SOPHIA RICK,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 42(1)(5), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BKC, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3362/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 June 2026AY 2019-204 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay should have been condoned and that the assessee is entitled to full TDS credit. This is because the employer deducted TDS but did not remit it to the revenue, and the assessee provided supporting documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed for delay in the first appellate stage. The assessee claimed full TDS credit, but only a partial credit was allowed by the CPC, leading to a demand. The assessee had pursued rectification before the CPC without success.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to full TDS credit when the employer deducted TDS but did not deposit it with the government, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 205

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 18.06.2026

आदेश की प्रनिनलनप अग्रेनर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुक्त/CIT 4. ववभागीयप्रवतवनवि/DR 5. गार्डफाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT MUMBAI

More judgments on Section 205

All 119 judgments and leading authorities on Section 205 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →