Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's main grievance was that the credit for taxes deducted at source (TDS) claimed at Rs.95,40,398/- was not fully allowed by the AO, CPC, and was restricted to Rs.65,77,525/-, despite the full amount appearing in Form 26AS. The Ld. CIT(A) had upheld the order of the AO.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that credit for taxes deducted at source must be allowed to the assessee based on the quantum appearing in Form 26AS. The Ld. AO-CPC was directed to verify the Form 26AS and allow the credit as per law.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee is entitled to full credit for TDS as appearing in Form 26AS, and whether the lower authorities erred in not allowing the full claimed amount.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA
Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Anil Kochar, Advocate Department represented by : Monalisha Pal Mukherjee, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 01.05.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 07.05.2025 O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 06.11.2024 for AY 2021-22.
1.1 In this case, the main grievance of the assessee is that the credit of taxes deducted at source have not taxed been fully allowed by the Ld. AO, CPC.
1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the order of Ld. AO with a finding on page 3 (para 3.2) of the impugned order.
“1.For that the orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad-in-law, to the extent to which they are prejudicial to the interests of the appellant.
For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not properly appreciating and analyzing the facts of the case of the appellant and consequently in dismissing the appeal on alleged grounds.
3. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the CPC in not allowing full credit of TDS claimed at Rs.95,40,398/- and instead restricting it to Rs.65,77,525/- without assigning any reason.
4. For that the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have directed the A.O. to allow the amount of TDS claimed at Rs.95,40,398/- by the appellant and which also was appearing in Form 26AS (TRACES).
For that the appellant craves leave to amend, alter, modify, substitute, add to, abridge and/or rescind any or all of the above grounds.” 2.1 Before us, the Ld. AR pointed out that the assessee was merely seeking credit for taxes deducted at source which were appearing in Form 26AS (TRACES). The Ld. DR on the other hand, supported the orders of authorities below.
We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the records placed before us. We find that this is a factual matter where credit for taxes deducted at source legally have to be allowed to the assessee on the basis of whatever quantum is appearing in Form 26AS. To this extent, the Ld. AO-CPC is directed to verify the same and allow as per law.
With these remarks, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.