MADHUCON SINOHYDRO JV,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 30.10.2018 declaring total income at Rs. Nil and refund claim of Rs. 3,11,48,481/-. The case was selected for scrutiny to verify large refund claim and contract receipts. The assessment has been completed under section 143(3), r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 07.04.2021 and accepted the income declared by the assessee with tax demand of Rs. 8,78,636/-.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) and challenged the tax demand computed by the AO, including interest charged under section 234D, and final tax demand after considering the TDS credit of Rs. 2,78,93,233/-. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed

Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.

The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A., referring to the order passed by the learned CIT(A), submitted that, the assessee has challenged the issue of computation of interest under section 234D and credit for TDS of Rs. 2,78,93,233/-, however, the learned CIT(A) has passed an order which is altogether different from the issue before him. From the above, it appears that the learned CIT(A) has altogether made a cut and paste of some other order, which is not applicable to the assessee. Therefore, he submitted that to consider the issue raised by the assessee, including the issue of interest under section 234D and TDS credit, the matter may be remanded to the file of AO.

The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, Shri Krishna Murthy, on the other hand, fairly agreed that, it seems there are some errors in the order of the learned CIT(A) on the issue raised by the assessee and therefore, the matter may be remanded to the file of

We have heard both parties, perused the material available on record and had gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3), r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B), the AO has not made any addition to the income. Further, the AO has determined tax payable at Rs. 8,78,636/- by considering the TDS claim of the assessee and refund issued already and finally raised demand of Rs. 8,78,636/-. The assessee has challenged the tax payable determined by the AO in light of refund claimed along with TDS credit of Rs. 3,11,48,481/- and argued that, although the assessee has made a claim of Rs. 3,11,48,481/-, but the AO has considered only TDS credit of Rs. 2,78,93,233/-. The learned CIT(A) without considering these aspects, simply passed an order, which is not at all applicable to the issues raised before him. We find that, there is no nexus between the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) and findings recorded by the learned CIT(A) vide his order dated 17.12.2025. From the above, it appears that, it is a cut and paste error while disposing

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.