What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, giving the assessee an opportunity to approach the employer for correction or deposit of TDS. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide a fair hearing.

The assessee claimed TDS credit of Rs. 76,200/- on salary, but it did not appear in Form 26AS. The employer had either not deposited the TDS or provided an incorrect PAN in the TDS return.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to TDS credit when the employer has failed to deposit the deducted tax or file the TDS return correctly.

Vishal Pachisia vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Kolkata 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Desai, (On behalf of Miraj D. Shah, A/R)

Hearing: 10/07/2023Pronounced: 24/07/2023

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 30/03/2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC was grossly erred in not directing Assessing Officer to allow the credit of TDS Rs. 76,200/- deducted on Salary by the employer but not deposited by employer to the credit of Central Government. 2) For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of Ld. CIT(Appeals) NFAC in not directing Assessing Officer to allow the credit of TDS of Rs. 76,200/- is highly arbitrary, unjustified, unwarranted to the facts of the case and untenable in law. 3) I may add, alter, amend, modify or withdraw any grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.”

Vishal Pachisia

When the case was called for, the representative on behalf of the assessee filed an adjournment application. However, considering the smallness of the issue regarding allowability of TDS credit of Rs.76,200/- and as the grounds contain the prayer for giving directions to the Assessing Officer to allow the credit of TDS of Rs.76,200/-, we deem it fit to hear the appeal with the assistance of the ld. D/R and perusing the available records and accordingly reject the application for adjournment.

The sole grievance of the assessee is that, the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in not directing the Assessing Officer to allow credit of TDS deducted on salary by the employer but not deposited by employer to the credit of Central Government.

We have heard the ld. D/R and perused the material placed before us.

We notice that the assessee has filed the return for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 30/03/2018 and in the said return, tax deducted at source on salary was claimed at Rs.76,200/-. However, since the said sum was not appearing under the name of the assessee in Form 26AS, the Centralized Processing Center (CPC), declined the said claim and raised demand against the assessee. Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed since at that time also the alleged that it was not appearing in the name of the assessee in Form 26AS. We further notice that the reason for the alleged sum Vishal Pachisia not appearing in Form 26AS under the employer of the assessee is that till the impugned proceedings were completed, the employer had either not deposited the said sum with the Government Authorities or wrong PAN has been feeded in the TDS return. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play and considering the sole ground raised by the assessee, we give one more opportunity to the assessee to appear before the ld. Assessing Officer and in the meantime make necessary efforts by approaching the employer to make necessary correction in the TDS return in case the amount has been deposited or in the alternative ask the employer to deposited the tax deducted at source from the salary of the assessee and file it in the TDS return so that credit appears in Form 26AS. Needless to mention that the assessee shall be provided sufficient opportunity of being heard.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as per the terms indicated above. Order pronounced in the Court on 24th July, 2023 at Kolkata. (DR. MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 24/07/2023 *SC SrPs Vishal Pachisia आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

VISHAL PACHISIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments