AMIT ASHOK CHANDWANI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be denied credit for TCS that was actually collected from them, even if the deductor failed to deposit it with the government. Relying on Section 205 of the IT Act and a coordinate bench decision, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to grant credit for the TCS.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a wholesale dealer of IMFL, was subjected to scrutiny assessment. The Assessing Officer disallowed sales promotion expenses and denied credit for Tax Collected at Source (TCS) of Rs. 74,14,161 on the grounds that the TCS was not reflected in Form 26AS. This led to a demand being raised.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is entitled to credit for TCS collected by the seller but not deposited with the government, despite it not appearing in Form 26AS.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.05.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(А), NFAC erred in confirming the action of the AO of NOT granting credit for TCS of Rs.74,14,161 by one Cromex Liquor Pvt.
Ltd. (the Supplier) on the ground of it being not reflected in online Form 26AS, even though the appellant has paid such TCS to the supplier along with respective bill payments.
The appellant prays that the AO be directed to
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.
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 205
- Hanoze Harish Thakkar, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer Ward 19(1)(5), MumbaiITA 9314/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Amitava Datta, Kolkata vs I.T.O., Ward - 62(1), KolkataITA 1674/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Disposed14 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- M. Visvesvaraya Industrial Research and… vs Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)…ITA 4343/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Sheth Fincap Services Private Limited… vs The Income-Tax Officer, DCIT 1(3)(1), MumbaiITA 4304/MUM/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2025-26
- Anita Grover, Delhi vs Income Tax Officer, DelhiITA 4305/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
