What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the revenue failed to demonstrate that the assessee controls Form 26AS. The CIT(A)'s direction to grant TDS credit if income is offered is in accordance with the Act.

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which directed the Assessing Officer to verify if the assessee's income was accounted for and to grant TDS credit accordingly. The revenue argued that correcting Form 26AS is the assessee's responsibility, not the AO's.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer is obligated to verify TDS discrepancies in Form 26AS and grant credit for income offered by the assessee.

ACIT vs Shyam Century Ferrous Limited… | ITAT Guwahati 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GAUHATI BENCH

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Advocate

For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kr. Karnani, Addl. CIT

Hearing: 27.04.2025Pronounced: 27.04.2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GAUHATI BENCH VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.266/GTY/2025 Assessment Year: 2024-25

ACIT, Circle-Shillong, Shyam Century Ferrous Shillong Limited

Vs Century House PO-Khleihriat, Lumshnong, Jaintia Hills, Lumshnong, Meghalaya- 793210. (PAN: AAPCS6873B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Santosh Kr. Karnani, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 27.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2025

ORDER Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A), Thiruvanantpuram [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no. ADDL/JCIT(A), THIRUVANANTPURAM/10038/2023-24 dated 17.07.2025 for the assessment year 2024-25.

ITA No.266/Gau/2025 2. Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Advocate, represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Santhosh Kr. Karnani, Addl. CIT represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. DR that the defect in Form 26AS is to be corrected by the assessee. It was the submission that JCIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to verify the TDS tallied with income declared as appearing in Form 26AS. It was the submission that this is not the duty of the Assessing Officer. It was the prayer that the order of the JCIT(A) is liable to be reversed.

In reply, the ld. AR vehemently supported the order of the JCIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. The main issue is that the revenue is aggrieved with the last paragraph of the order of the JCIT(A) wherein the JCIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the income of the assessee is accounted for and if so, give the corresponding TDS credit appearing in Form 26AS for the A.Y 2024-25 in accordance with law. The revenue has not been able to show as to how the assessee is in control over the Form 26AS shows the TDS. The JCIT(A) has directed that the TDS credit is to be given if the income has been offered. This is as per the provisions of the Act. This being so, we find no infirmity in the order of the JCIT(A) which calls for any interference.

ITA No.266/Gau/2025

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27/04/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member Dated: 27/04/2026 RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SHILLONG, SHILLONG vs. SHYAM CENTURY FERROUS LIMITED, CENTURY HOUSE PO- KHLEIHRIAT, LUMSHNONG, JAINTIA H

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments