JAMSHED R BILIMORIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO-19(1)(5), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN () Assessment Year: 2023-24
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 30.09.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals) [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2023-24, raising following grounds:
The Appe 11,41,190/- 2. The Com upholding th rightly not g claimed in t same did no 3. Both the and CPC err the assets h benefit, is re Appellant's o 4. The learn CPC erred in credit of Rs. 74,66,005/- beneficiary, read with ru 5. The learn upholding th 12,38,459/- not claimed trust. 6. Having re the Appellan credit to the 2. Briefly stated, f return of income for income at Rs.99,82 assessee was process 143(1) of the Income dated 11.10.2023, w returned but credit ITA ellant objects to the demand determ . mmissioner of Income Tax (Appea hat the Centralized Processing Centr ranted TDS credit to the extent of Rs. the return of income only on the ba t appear in the 26AS of the Appellant. learned Commissioner of Income T red in not considering the fact that the held in the Trust created for the App equired to be taxed u/s 161(1) of th own hands. ned Commissioner of Income Tax (A n upholding that CPC has rightly not . 12,38,459/-, inspite of assessing in from the trust in which the Appellan ignoring the provisions of section 19 ule 37BA. ed Commissioner of Income tax (Appe hat CPC has rightly not granted TDS despite acknowledging the fact that t the TDS credit in the return of income egard to the facts and circumstances nt submits that the CPC be directed tune of Rs. 12,38,459/-. facts of the case are that the a r the year under consideration 2,560/-. The return of incom sed by the Central Processing C e-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the wherein the CPC accepted th t for the claim of tax dedu Jamshed R Bilimoria 2 A No. 6066/MUM/2024 mined of Rs. als) erred in re (CPC) has 12,38,459/- asis that the . Tax (Appeals) e income from pellant's sole he Act in the Appeals) and granted TDS ncome of Rs. nt is the sole 99 of the Act eals) erred in credit of Rs. the trust had e filed by the s of the case, to grant TDS assessee filed its n declaring total me filed by the Centre (CPC) u/s Act’) vide order he total income cted at source amounting to Rs.12, the Ld. CIT(A) direct the assessee and allo the assessee is in app 3. We have heard the relevant material Bilimoria trust’ was c of trust dated 15.12. trustee along with ot beneficiary of the sai section 161(1) of the trust was required t assessee accordingly
Interest Incom
Dividend Inco
Short Term c
Long Term C
Long Term C
3.1 Although the de trust as said investm claimed relevant TD appearing in the Fo
Income-tax Departme
Rules’) for acknowle trust. The trust filed
ITA
38,459/- was not granted. On ted the Assessing Officer to ver ow as per the provisions of the peal before the Tribunal.
rival submissions of the parti ls on record. A private trust na created by the parents of the ass
2004 in which the brother of th ther two professionals. The asse id trust. According to the asses e Act income from the assets h to be taxed in the hands of th offered following income in his
Gross
TDS me
22,70,305
249,120
ome
51,95,700
9,89,339
74,66,005
12,38,45
capital Gain
1,65,374
NIL apital Gain
10,11,364
NIL apital Gain
16,48,619
NIL eductor deducted the TDS in th ments were made by the trust, b
DS credit in his return. The orm No. 26AS [i.e. a form pre ent under Income-tax Rules 196
dging the TDS credit of each d return of income declaring n
Jamshed R Bilimoria
3
A No. 6066/MUM/2024
further appeal, rify the claim of e Act. Aggrieved, ies and perused amely ‘Jamshed sessee vide deed he assessee is a essee is the sole ssee in terms of held in the said e assessee. The hand:
0
9
59
he name of the but the assessee said TDS were escribed by the 62 (in short ‘the person], of the nil income. The assessee claimed th income of the trust, not claimed. Thus th for the tax in the y assessee, the corresp the assessee in the s submission of the as Assessing Officer to TDS as per provision
“In the pres that income also filed by claimed by 2023-24. Th
ITR for the A Trust and cl
26AS of the In view of th the CPC Ben reflected in was allowe submitted th appellant hi
Hence, the A and allow
Income Tax
3.1 The issue befor
Deducted at Source beneficiary of a trust the name of the trus
ITA at in the prescribed form for it was demonstrated that the he assessee urged that since inco year under consideration in th ponding TDS credit should have same year. The Ld. CIT(A) after ssessee and provisions of the l verify the claim of the assesse s of the Act observing as under:
ent appeal under consideration, it is and TDS is related with the Trust an y the Trust showing Nil income and no the Trust in the ITR filed for the A he Appellant in the capacity of Indiv
Asstt. Year 2023-24 showing income aimed TDS, which was also shown in Trust.
he above discussion, the restriction ngaluru is held to be correct, because
Form 26AS of the Appellant, hence ed by the CPC. Further, the appe hat as per Trust deed dated 15-12- mself is the sole beneficiary in the s
AO is directed to verify the claim of the the TDS as per provisions
Act, 1961.”
re us pertains to the denial o e (TDS) to the assessee, wh t, on the ground that the tax w t and, consequently, was reflec
Jamshed R Bilimoria
4
A No. 6066/MUM/2024
filing return of TDS credit was ome was offered he hands of the been allowed to considering the law directed the e and allow the :
s observed nd ITR has o TDS was Asstt. Year vidual filed related to n the Form of TDS by no TDS is e no credit ellant has -2004, the said Trust.
e Appellant of the f credit for Tax ho is the sole was deducted in ted in Form No.
26AS of the trust rat
It is the settled posit only if the said am relevant assessee. Sin appearing in the Fo
Officer, relying strictl such credit. Ideally, deductor deducted ta the name of the trus
Department has neit the trust nor in the deducted at source while, at the same assessee. This amou be countenanced in directed the Assessi grant TDS credit in a tax Act, 1961. If suc passing of this order necessary steps to ad trust for the transfer trust to the Form No the credit in accord assessee are accordin
ITA her than in the Form No. 26AS tion that the Department grants mount appears in the Form N nce the TDS credit in the prese orm No. 26AS of the assessee ly on procedural compliance, d the assessee ought to have en ax in the hands of the assessee st. However, the crux of the ma ther granted credit for the TDS e hands of the assessee. As a continues to remain with th time, a demand has been rais unts to an inequitable situation law. We note that the Ld. CIT ing Officer to verify the assess accordance with the provisions ch credit has not been granted
, we hereby direct the Assessing ddress the request of both the a r of TDS credit from the Form N
. 26AS of the assessee and, the ance with law. The grounds o ngly allowed for statistical purpo
Jamshed R Bilimoria
5
A No. 6066/MUM/2024
of the assessee.
s credit for TDS o. 26AS of the ent case was not , the Assessing declined to grant nsured that the e rather than in atter is that the in the hands of result, the tax he Government, sed against the n, which cannot
T(A) has already see’s claim and s of the Income- d till the date of g Officer to take assessee and the No. 26AS of the ereafter, to allow of appeal of the oses.
In the result, statistical purposes. Order pronoun (RAJ KUMAR C JUDICIAL M Mumbai; Dated: 21/02/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
ITA the appeal of the assessee ced in the open Court on 21/0
CHAUHAN)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu
Jamshed R Bilimoria
6
A No. 6066/MUM/2024
is allowed for 02/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai