Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA No. 1944/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year 2015-16
Jyotindra Rasiklal Gange, The ITO, Opp. Atithi Dinning Hall Ward-3(3)(2), Lane, Judges Bungalow Vs Ahmedabad Road, Bodakdev, (Respondent) Ahmedabad PAN: AEPPG3981F (Appellant)
Revenue by: Shri N. Das Gupta, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: None Date of hearing : 03-06-2019 Date of pronouncement : 10-06-2019 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2015-16, arises from order of the CIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad dated 15-06-2016, in proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. 2. The issue in the grounds of appeal is against the decision of ld. CIT(A) in not allowing TDS deduction of Rs.20,000/-. The brief fact is that assessee has filed return of income on 22nd 3. August, 2015. The return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the act on 30th Nov, 2015 by the ACIT, CPC, Bangalore. The assessee has claimed
I.T.A No. 1944/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 2 Jyotindra Rasiklal Gange vs. ITO
total income tax refund at Rs. 83,815/-. However vide intimation u/s. 143(1), the CPC has allowed total income tax refund at the amount of Rs. 66,367/-.
The assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse stating that there was no evidence on record to show that the deductor has deducted tax of Rs. 20,000/- claimed in the computation of total income filed by the assessee.
During the course of appellate proceedings before us, nobody has attended from the side of the assessee. However, the written submission was filed by the assessee on 28th August, 2018. On the other hand, the ld. departmental representative has supported the order of lower authorities stating that there was no evidence on record to demonstrate that indeed deductor has deducted any tax to the amount of Rs. 20,000/-
We have heard the ld. departmental representative and perused the material on record. It is noticed that assessee has filed return of income on 22nd August, 2015 claiming refund of Rs. 83815/-. In the computation of income filed along with the return of income (revised), the assessee has claimed tax deducted at source of Rs. 20,000/- from M/s Graft Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. The income tax return filed by the assessee was processed by the CPC, Bangalore on 30th Nov, 2015 and total credit for TDS was given at Rs. 78,500/- as against claim of TSD credit of Rs. 98,500/- claimed in the return of income. The assessee has claimed that M/s Graft laboratories Pvt. Ltd. has paid it Rs. 1,80,000/- after deduction of tax Rs. 20,000/- out of gross
I.T.A No. 1944/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 3 Jyotindra Rasiklal Gange vs. ITO
professional receipt of Rs. 2 lacs. The assessee has also claimed before the ld. CIT(A) that M/s. Graft Laboratories has made the aforesaid payment after deducting TDS of Rs. 20,000/-. The assessee has also referred decision of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat vide Special Civil Application no. 2349 of 2014 in the case of Sumit Devendra Rajani Vs. ACIT order dated 23-06- 2014. We observe that in the aforesaid case as per form no. 16A, the deductor has deducted the tax at source before paying salary to the dedcutee therefore it is held that if the department is of the opinion that deductor has not deposited the said amount of tax deducted at source, it will always been open for the department to recover the same from the deductor. However, in the case of the assessee, as per material on record, it is noticed that there is no certificate of form no. 16/16A issued by the deductor M/s. Graft Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. as evidence of deduction of tax. Even there was no copy of form no. 26AS placed in the return demonstrating that tax was deducted by the deductor out of professional receipt made to the assessee. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the impugned claim of the assessee of deduction of tax by the deductor to the amount of Rs. 20,000/- is required to be adjudicated on merit after verification and examination of the following material to be produced by the assessee. (i) Form No. 16/16A issued by the deductor M/s Graft Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (ii) Form No. 26AS showing detail of tax deducted at source and detail of payment made and detail of TDS deposited etc. (iii) Challans/copies of TDS deposited by the deductor
I.T.A No. 1944/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 4 Jyotindra Rasiklal Gange vs. ITO
(iv) Detail regarding TDS return filed by the deductor along with PAN No and TAN No. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, we direct the assessing officer to decide the issue on verification of the above referred material to be produced by the assessee. Accordingly, the issue is set aside to the file of the assessing officer to be decided as above after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10-06-2019
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 10/06/2019 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद