H.R.ART AND CRAFT,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALURU /ITO, WARD-3(2), BANGULURU/ JODHPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:
This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.03.2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2018-19 challenging
2 ITA No. 62/Jodh/2022 H.R. Art and Craft v. DCIT, CPC therein the rejection of the appellant’s claim of the TDS and IGST payments.
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the
CPC, Banguluru has made additions u/s 143(1)(a) in respect of IGST
payments amounting to Rs. 72,512/- and TDS amounting to Rs. 4,660/- for
the reason that the same has been shown in column no. 26B(b) for Form
3CD of the audit report. Although, the assessee has filed revised Form
3CD on 04.03.2019 mentioned the details of the said payments in column
no. 26(B)(a) with challan no. (APB pg. no. 7 to 20). The ld. CIT(A) has
ignored to consider the facts and written submissions including the copy of
the payments of challan in respect of IGST and TDS has annexed thereof
(APB pg. no. 1 to 20). He requested that the appellant assessee has
legitimate claim of the payments of TDS and IGST may be allowed and due
refund be issued by the AO.
Per contra, the ld. DR for the department submitted that the ld. CIT(A)
has been furnished rejected the claim of the appellant that the assessee
3 ITA No. 62/Jodh/2022 H.R. Art and Craft v. DCIT, CPC has only filed revised Form 3CD but not filed revised computation of total
income for revised return of income and hence, there is no change in the
income of the assessee firm.
We have heard both the sides, perused the record, written
submissions and the impugned order. Admittedly, the appellant assessee
has objected payments of IGST and TDS amounting to Rs. 77,172/-
(72,512+4,660) as per the copy of challan (APB pg. no. 5 to 6). The ld.
CIT(A) was required to verify the payments of the IGST and TDS as per the
documentary evidences produced before him under the co-terminus
powers. Merely, stating that the assessee has not filed revised return or
revised computation is not valid reason is rejecting the claim of the
assessee without rebuttal of the documentary evidence filed on record. In
our view, this is a fit case to be remanded back to the AO to examine the
claim of the appellant in respect of all the said payments of Rs.77,172/-
towards in respect of IGST and TDS (APB pg. no. 5 to 6) after granting
4 ITA No. 62/Jodh/2022 H.R. Art and Craft v. DCIT, CPC proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee and
considering documentary evidences filed on record. On verification of the
copy of the challan of the payments of IGST and TDS, the AO would liable
to give credit for the said payments and issue refund if any due to the
assessee thereof. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the AO.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.10.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench
