SHASHVAT SOMANY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 61(3),, KOLKATA

IN THE INCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA Before ShriRajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and ShriPradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.630/Kol/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24

Shashvat Somany………….………………….………………………….Appellant 2, Red Cross place, Kolkata- 700001 [PAN No. ENCPS4665E] Vs. ITO, Ward 61(3),,……………………..…………….………... Respondent, Bamboo, Villa, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road Kolkata- 700014 Appearances by: Shri P.K. Sanghai, FCAappeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri, S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR,appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 19, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order :May 20 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 18.12.2025 of the Office of the Income Tax Officer passed under Section 154of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The brief facts of the case of the assessee are that assessee being an individual had filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2023-24 declaring total income of Rs. 1,53,10,502/-. The same was processed u/s 143(1) by the CPC and raised the demand of Rs. 29,510/-. On perusal of the intimation order that the credit of TCS was restricted to 2,85,627 by CPC,Assessee filed a rectification application, rectification order was passed in which credit of TCS was

ITA No.2839/Kol/2025 again restricted to Rs. 2,85,627/-. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied the assessee preferred appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR challenges very impugned order thereby submitting that the CIT(A) erred in passing the order without allowing credit of TCS amounting to Rs. 37,262/- ignoring the fact that the same was duly collected from the assessee by HDFC Bank from the foreign remittance by the assessee under LRS. The Ld. AR submits that the TCS of Rs. 37,262/- was wrongly deposited by the bank in the Pan of father of the assessee being the joint holder of the bank account and it was not reflected in 26AS of the assessee. The Ld. AR submits that the CIT(A) erred in not allowing the credit of TCS amounting to Rs. 37,262/- to the assessee although it was contended with evidence that it has not been claimed in the Income Tax Return by Sri Sandip Somany father of the assessee in whose pan the TCS was mistakenly deposited by the bank although it is appearing in 26AS. The Ld. AR submits that non-allowance of the credit of the TCS being correctly, rightly and genuine belonging to the assessee and claim would tentamount to double taxation to that extent and thus be given due credit of the said amount. Contrary to that Ld. DR supports the impugned order by submitting that it is a case in which of fresh verification is required by the AO as the assessee failed to discharge his onus to established the fact as submitted. 4. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the impugned order we find that return was processed by the CPC and intimation order passed in which it was 2

ITA No.2839/Kol/2025 noticed that although the total income determined was correctly captured but an amount of Rs. 37262/- as TCS which was collected by bank from the remittance to foreign country has not been credited. The submission of the AR is that in fact the TCS was collected by HDFC bank from his bank account which was in the joint name with his father Sri Sandip Somanybut mistakenly the bank filled up Pan of his father Sri Sandip Somany in the TCS return filed by them resulting into a peculiar circumstances i.eform 26AS of the assessee does not show this amount but being shownin 26AS of his father. It is a fact that TCS was not claimed by Sri Sandip Somanyin his income tax return although it is appearing in his form 26AS. The submission of the AR is that the TCS appears in 26AS of Sri Sandip Somany but the same was never claimed by him as he was not entitled. The submission of the AR is that TCS was collected by HDFC Bank from his bank account bearing No. 00081840001623 which was in the name of the assessee and his father Sri Sandip Somany, however mistakenly the bank filled up Pan of his father Sri Sandip Somanyin the TCS returned filed by them as a result of which has form 26 does not show this amount but the sim could not be as shown and 26AS of his father Sri Sandip Somany under his pan. 5. Considering the submission of the assessee we arein this view that it is a case of proper verification by the Assessing Officer in the light of submission made and also on perusing the documents. Accordingly, we directed the AO to pass a fresh order after taking all effective steps which is essential to come into the right and just conclusion.The order passed by lower authorities are herebyset a side. Appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of AO. As a result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

ITA No.2839/Kol/2025

Kolkata, the 20th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:. . 20.5.2026. DC, PS

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

ITA No.2839/Kol/2025