RESMI DEEPCHAND OSWAL,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 361/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 May 2026AY 2021-223 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO should verify if the other co-owners offered their share of rental income and did not claim TDS credit. If this is confirmed, the AO should allow the remaining TDS credit to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed TDS credit of Rs. 36,637/- on rental income. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this credit as the assessee had only offered her proportionate share of rental income, while the TDS was deposited for the total rent received from the property.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to claim the full TDS credit when only a proportionate share of rental income was offered, and the TDS was deposited for the entire rent.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: HON’BLE MANISH BORAD & HON’BLE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Shri Pramod Shahakar, JCIT

आदेश / ORDER

PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 24.12.2025 pertain to A.Y 2020-21 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 27.12.2022.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO not allowing the credit for TDS at Rs. 36,637/- merely on the ground of offering proportionate rental income.

ITA 361/PUN/2026 RESMI DEEPCHAND OSWAL 3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. We observe that t placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and he assessee is an individual and he assessee is an individual and source of income is income from house property, income from source of income is income from house property, income from source of income is income from house property, income from source of income is income from house property, income from partnership firm, short term capital gain and income from other partnership firm, short term capital gain and income from other partnership firm, short term capital gain and income from other partnership firm, short term capital gain and income from other sources. Income of Rs. 9,35,800/ sources. Income of Rs. 9,35,800/- declar declared in the return for A.Y return for A.Y 2021-22 e-filed on 01.03.2022. S filed on 01.03.2022. Subsequent to the search and ubsequent to the search and ubsequent to the search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act conducted at assessee’s premises seizure action u/s 132 of the Act conducted at assessee’s premises seizure action u/s 132 of the Act conducted at assessee’s premises seizure action u/s 132 of the Act conducted at assessee’s premises on 25.08.2021, the year under consideration taken up for complete on 25.08.2021, the year under consideration taken up for complete on 25.08.2021, the year under consideration taken up for complete on 25.08.2021, the year under consideration taken up for complete scrutiny. So far as issue raised in the instant appeal is concern scrutiny. So far as issue raised in the instant appeal is concern scrutiny. So far as issue raised in the instant appeal is concerned scrutiny. So far as issue raised in the instant appeal is concern we note that the assessee we note that the assessee jointly owned an immovable property jointly owned an immovable property jointly owned an immovable property located at Pune and rented to Hardware Concepts India Pvt Ltd located at Pune and rented to Hardware Concepts India Pvt Ltd located at Pune and rented to Hardware Concepts India Pvt Ltd located at Pune and rented to Hardware Concepts India Pvt Ltd (HCIPL). The assessee had 14% share and remaining 86% share is (HCIPL). The assessee had 14% share and remaining 86% share is (HCIPL). The assessee had 14% share and remaining 86% share is (HCIPL). The assessee had 14% share and remaining 86% share is by Lalita S Oswal, Rekha R Oswal, Sanjeeta V Oswal, Santosh by Lalita S Oswal, Rekha R Oswal, Sanjeeta V Oswal, Santosh by Lalita S Oswal, Rekha R Oswal, Sanjeeta V Oswal, Santosh by Lalita S Oswal, Rekha R Oswal, Sanjeeta V Oswal, Santosh Prakash Oswal, Sovan Uttamcha Prakash Oswal, Sovan Uttamchand Oswal and Lata A Oswal. T wal and Lata A Oswal. Total otal rent received from HCIPL for the year under consideration is Rs. the year under consideration is Rs. the year under consideration is Rs. 5,69,918/- and individual share of each owner is Rs. 81,416/ and individual share of each owner is Rs. 81,416/ and individual share of each owner is Rs. 81,416/-. The . The total TDS is Rs. 42,744/ total TDS is Rs. 42,744/-. Admittedly all the co . Admittedly all the co-owners have owners have claimed to offer their respectiv claimed to offer their respective share of rental income in their e share of rental income in their e share of rental income in their income tax return and paid due taxes. income tax return and paid due taxes.

4.

However, controversy has arised because the tenant i.e HCIPL However, controversy has arised because the tenant i.e HCIPL However, controversy has arised because the tenant i.e HCIPL However, controversy has arised because the tenant i.e HCIPL has deposited TDS of Rs. 42,744/ has deposited TDS of Rs. 42,744/- under the PAN of the assessee as under the PAN of the assessee as under the PAN of the assessee as a result of which in Form 26AS of the assessee a result of which in Form 26AS of the assessee a result of which in Form 26AS of the assessee the TDS credit of Rs. TDS credit of Rs. 42,744/- is appearing. In the income tax return the assessee has is appearing. In the income tax return the assessee has is appearing. In the income tax return the assessee has is appearing. In the income tax return the assessee has declared her share of rental her share of rental income of Rs. 81,422/ income of Rs. 81,422/- but has claimed but has claimed total TDS of Rs. 42,744/ total TDS of Rs. 42,744/-. Ideally the share of TDS of each co . Ideally the share of TDS of each co- . Ideally the share of TDS of each co owner of Rs. 6,106/ owner of Rs. 6,106/- should have been sh should have been shown in the respective own in the respective returns but due to the mistake at the end of tenant HCIPL, the returns but due to the mistake at the end of tenant HCIPL, the returns but due to the mistake at the end of tenant HCIPL, the returns but due to the mistake at the end of tenant HCIPL, the assessee had no option except assessee had no option except to claim the credit of total TDS of Rs. claim the credit of total TDS of Rs. claim the credit of total TDS of Rs. 42,744/-. However ld. AO has declined TDS credit of Rs. 36,637/ . However ld. AO has declined TDS credit of Rs. 36,637/ . However ld. AO has declined TDS credit of Rs. 36,637/- . However ld. AO has declined TDS credit of Rs. 36,637/ because the assessee offered only h because the assessee offered only her share of rental income. er share of rental income.

5.

Before this Tribunal ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated Before this Tribunal ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated Before this Tribunal ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated Before this Tribunal ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that the other co that the other co-owners have not claimed TDS credit and paid the owners have not claimed TDS credit and paid the owners have not claimed TDS credit and paid the applicable taxes. Considering the facts of the case and also applicable taxes. Considering the facts of the case and also applicable taxes. Considering the facts of the case and also that the the income tax returns returns of the remaining six co remaining six co-owners are claimed to are claimed to

ITA 361/PUN/2026 RESMI DEEPCHAND OSWAL have been filed, have been filed, it will create a practical difficulty firstly for the it will create a practical difficulty firstly for the it will create a practical difficulty firstly for the tenant to revise the TDS tenant to revise the TDS return and then the respective co and then the respective co-owners owners have to revise their return have to revise their return, time for which have already expired. time for which have already expired. time for which have already expired. Therefore con Therefore considering the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate sidering the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate sidering the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (in to remit the issue to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (in to remit the issue to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (in to remit the issue to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (in short “ld. JAO”) for limited purpose of verifying the income tax short “ld. JAO”) for limited purpose of verifying the income tax short “ld. JAO”) for limited purpose of verifying the income tax short “ld. JAO”) for limited purpose of verifying the income tax return of the remaining six co return of the remaining six co-owners name owners named above, details of which which shall be furnished by the assessee and after due verification if it is shall be furnished by the assessee and after due verification if it is shall be furnished by the assessee and after due verification if it is shall be furnished by the assessee and after due verification if it is found that the respective co found that the respective co-owners have offered their share of owners have offered their share of owners have offered their share of rental income in their ITR and has not claimed TDS rental income in their ITR and has not claimed TDS rental income in their ITR and has not claimed TDS credit deducted credit deducted on the rent the on the rent then ld. AO shall allow the benefit n ld. AO shall allow the benefit of remaining TDS TDS to the assessee. Needless to mention that Needless to mention that credit of Rs. 36,637 of Rs. 36,637/- to the assessee. the ld. JAO shall afford proper opportunity to the assessee. the ld. JAO shall afford proper opportunity to the assessee. the ld. JAO shall afford proper opportunity to the assessee. the ld. JAO shall afford proper opportunity to the assessee. Further, we direct the assessee to remain cooperative in Further, we direct the assessee to remain cooperative in Further, we direct the assessee to remain cooperative in Further, we direct the assessee to remain cooperative in furnishing the details called for by the ld. furnishing the details called for by the ld. furnishing the details called for by the ld.JAO. Finding of l Finding of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on Order pronounced in the open court on Order pronounced in the open court on 18.05.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE MANISH BORAD JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune Dated: 18.05.2026 6

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →