LIEBHERR WERK NENZING GMBH,AUSTRIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - CIRCLE 3(1)(2), MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘I’ BENCH
MUMBAI
BEFORE: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
&
SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Liebherr Werk Nenzing
GMBH
Dr Hans Liebherr STR 1,
STR 1,6710, Nenzing,
Austria
C/o. Liebherr India Private
Limited
Unit No. A301 - A305, 03rd level, 05th Floor, A-Wing,
Tower 1, Seawoods Grand
Central, Plot No. R-1,
Sector 40, Nerul Node,
Seawoods Navi Mumbai -
400 706. Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (International
Taxation), Circle-3(1)(2),
Mumbai
Assistant Director of Income- tax, Bangalore
The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (International
Taxation), Circle-3(1)(2),
Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla
Complex, Mumbai – 400 051. PAN/GIR No. AACCL5795N
(Appellant)
..
(Respondent)
Assessee by Shri. Abdul Kadir
Jamsadwala
Revenue by Shri. Krishna Kumar,
Sr. DR
Date of Hearing
11/09/2025
Date of Pronouncement
15/09/2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (A.M):
The present appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the Ld.
Commissioner of Income–tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless
Liebherr Werk Nenzing GMBH
2
Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”]
u/s. 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2017-18. 2. The limited issue under consideration pertains to non-grant of credit for tax deducted at source amounting to Rs. 9,04,380/-.
During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 2,33,85,555/- claiming refund of Rs. 9,61,210/-. It was submitted that while filing its return of income, the assessee has claimed credit for tax deducted at source amounting to Rs. 32,99,768/- as per Form 26AS issued for the year under consideration. Thereafter, rectifications order dated 08.10.2020 was served on the assessee, whereby the intimation dated 27.03.2019 issued u/s. 143(1) was suo-moto rectified. It was submitted that in said rectification order, the CPC, Bangalore has granted credit for tax deducted at source for an amount of Rs. 23,95,388/- thereby not granted the credit for the balance tax deducted of Rs. 9,04,380/-. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the rectification order passed u/s. 154 of the Act and it was submitted that as evident from the rectification order, the CPC has stated that since the tax credit claimed by the assessee in the return of income is not matched as reflected in Form 26AS at the time of processing the return of income, therefore, the credit to the extent unmatched with the entries in Form 26AS has been Liebherr Werk Nenzing GMBH
3
denied to the assessee. It was submitted that the same is a factual incorrect position and our reference was drawn to the Form 26AS which was available as part of the assessee’s paper book. It was submitted that as evident from Form 26AS capturing the data updated till 14.11.2017, wherein the TDS so claimed by the assessee have been duly reflected. In particular, it was submitted that Adani Petronet Port Pvt Ltd.
has deducted TDS amounting to Rs. 8,86,944/- which is duly reflected in Form 26AS. It was submitted that the CPC has allowed part credit of the said TDS and the part credit has not been allowed to the extent of Rs. 4,42,333/- which is factually incorrect as this is only single entry in Form 26AS amounting to Rs. 886944/-. Further reference was drawn to the TDS deducted by Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd, wherein an amount of Rs.
3,76,062/- has been deducted which is again duly reflected in Form 26AS and reference was also drawn to the TDS deducted by Starlift Services Private Limited amounting to Rs. 85,985/-.
It was accordingly submitted that factually there is no mismatch in the TDS so claimed by the assessee in its return of income and as reflected in Form 26AS. Therefore, the AO be directed to grant necessary relief whereby due credit of TDS claimed by the assessee be allowed.
The ld. DR has been heard who has relied on the order passed by the CPC as well as by the ld. CIT(A). Liebherr Werk Nenzing GMBH
4
5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. As evident from Form 26AS, we find that the TDS entries towards the TDS done by the respective entities namely, Adani Petronet Port Ltd (Rs 8,86,944),
Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd (Rs 3,76,062) and Starlift Services Pvt
Ltd (Rs 85,985) are duly reflected as so claimed by the assessee in its return of income and as such, there is no mismatch as so pointed out by CPC. We, therefore, do not find any justifiable basis for denial of credit so made by the assessee company in its return of income. The AO is accordingly directed to take into consideration the entries so reflected in the Form 26AS and grant the necessary credit to the extent of Rs 9,04,380/- to the assessee company.
In the result, the appeal so filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in open court on 15.09.2025. (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai; Dated 15/09/2025
Anandi Nambi, Steno
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. Liebherr Werk Nenzing GMBH
BY ORDER,
(Asstt.