GAURAV TIWARI,UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), GURUGRAM
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी
ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आअसं.1696/िदʟी/2025(िन.व. 2018-19)
Gaurav Tiwari,
1401, Tower-6, Unitech Horizon, Sector PI-2,
Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201310
PAN: AEZPT-4925-L
...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant
बनाम Vs.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle 1(1), Gurugram, Haryana 122016
..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent
अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/Appellant by : S/Shri Ajay Goyal & Mudit Dewan, Advocates
ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, SR.DR
सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing
:
30/07/2025
घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement :
:
30/07/2025
आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’]
dated 15.01.2025, for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee in appeal has raised as many as ten grounds of appeal. The ld.
Counsel for the assessee restricted his submissions only to ground no. 6 of appeal only assailing non grant of tax credit.
3. Shri Ajay Goyal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer (AO) has failed to give credit of TDS deducted against the income of the assessee and also the credit of Self Tax Assessment Tax paid by the assessee for the impugned assessment year. He contended that if the credit of tax already
2
deducted for AY 2018-19 and self assessment tax is allowed, the demand for AY
2018-19 would be reduced to NIL.
4. Ms. Sudha Gupta, representing the department fairly stated that this limited issue can be restored back to the Assessing Officer for verification.
5. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The short issue contended before us by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the AO has not given benefit of TDS and Self Assessment Tax to the assessee. The contention of the assessee is that TDS to the extent of Rs.5,24,546/- was deducted by the employers and the assessee has deposited self assessment tax to the tune of Rs.3,66,100/-.
Thus, the AO has failed to give credit of taxes already paid aggregating to Rs.8,90,646/-. Considering the submissions made by rival sides, I deem it appropriate to restore the issue back to the juri ictional AO for limited purpose of verification; if the credit of TDS and Self Assessment Tax for impugned assessment year has not been allowed to the assessee, the same be allowed. Thus, ground no.
6 of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
6. The assessee in ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal has assailed validity of reassessment proceedings. Since, no submissions were made by the Counsel for the assessee on this issue, ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are dismissed.
7. Ground no. 1 and 5 of appeal are general in nature, hence, require no separate adjudication.
8. In ground no. 7 of appeal, the assessee has assailed charging of interest u/s.
234B of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Charging of interest u/s. 234B of the Act is consequential and mandatory, hence, ground no. 7
of appeal is dismissed.
3
9. In ground no. 8 of appeal, the assessee has assailed initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 270A of the Act. Challenge to penalty proceedings at this stage is premature. Hence, ground no. 8 of appeal is dismissed.
10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid.
Order pronounced in the open court on Wedne ay the 30th day of July,
2025. (VIKAS AWASTHY)
᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 30/07/2025
NV/-
ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant ,
2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent.
3. The PCIT
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी
5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Asstt.