HIGHRISE SLIPFORM INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,PANVEL MAHARASHTRA vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS-2, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1267/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 September 20264 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Highrise Slipform Infra Private Limited, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2024-25 on 27.09.2024, declaring a loss. The assessee did not claim credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) amounting to Rs. 1,75,331/- in its original return. Subsequently, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A) seeking this credit. However, the appeal was filed with a delay of 228 days. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as time-barred, refusing to condone the delay. The assessee is now before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT heard the rival contentions and perused the record.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 228 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A), considering the death of the Director's father as a reasonable cause, and relied on the Apex Court judgments in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. and Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. The appeal was admitted for adjudication. Regarding the merits, the Tribunal noted that the assessee claims TDS credit of Rs. 1,75,331/- as per Form 26AS, and according to Section 199 read with Rule 37BA, credit should be granted once TDS is deducted and deposited. The assessee's computation of income showed TDS of Rs. 1,72,056/- deducted by Rungta Mines Limited and Rs. 54,732/- by Power Mech Projects Limited. The Tribunal held that if tax has been deducted at source on receipts disclosed by the assessee, credit for such TDS should be granted. However, this fact required verification. Therefore, the matter was restored to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer (AO) for verification of the Income Tax Return, Audited Balance Sheet, Form 26AS, and ledger accounts of the deductors. The AO was directed to allow credit for TDS after due verification and afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity. The effective grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should condone the delay of 228 days in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A), considering the reasons provided by the assessee? (Question of mixed law and fact, relying on principles of condonation of delay). Assessee's contention: The delay was caused by the death of the Director's father on 03.05.2025, which prevented the timely filing of the appeal. This constitutes a 'reasonable cause'. The assessee relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. and Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2025 INSC 382). Revenue's contention: No specific contention from the revenue is recorded in the judgment regarding the condonation of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 199,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Tulsidas Vazirani
For Respondent: Dr. Amit Munde
Hearing: 25.08.2026Pronounced: 29.09.2026

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2024-25 is directed against the order dated 13.01.2026 of ld.Addl/JCIT(A)-2. Hyderabad emanating out of Intimation order dated 06.10.2024 passed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The only grievance of the assessee is that CPC has not allowed the credit for TDS at Rs.1,75,331/- merely for not claiming the same in the original return.

3.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is a Private Limited Company and filed the return of income for A.Y. 2024-25 on 27.09.2024 declaring loss of Rs.3,48

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 199

All 528 judgments and leading authorities on Section 199 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →