Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income and claimed a refund. A rectification application for TDS credit was filed but was rejected, and a demand was raised. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on grounds of delay and the non-appealable nature of CPGRAM closure.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before it, finding the explanation genuine. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not commented on the merits of the case regarding TDS credit. The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on grounds of delay without considering the merits of the TDS credit claim, and whether the matter should be remanded to the AO for proper adjudication.
Sections Cited
143(1), 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble
आदेश/ORDER
Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:
These three appeals are filed against the order dated 31-07-2024 passed by CIT(A)/Addl/JCIT(A)-9, Mumbai for assessment years 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23.
The grounds of appeals are as under:-
A.Y. 2020-21 “1. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in points of law and facts.
2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has to 328/Ahd/2025 Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust, A.Y. 2020-21 to 2023-24 erred in holding that appeal was filed late and therefore, he did not condone alleged delay. It is submitted that appeal was filed in time. Appeal was filed on 29/05/2024 against rejection of our grievance on 23/04/2024 and received by us on 30/04/2024.
3. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in not granting credit of TDS amounting to Rs 35,493.
4. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in raising demand of Rs 5,467.
5. Your appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend all or any of the above grounds of appeal as may be advised from time to time.”
A.Y. 2021-22 “1. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in points of law and facts.
2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that appeal was filed late and therefore, he did not condone alleged delay. It is submitted that appeal was filed in time. Appeal was filed on 29/05/2024 against rejection of our grievance on 23/04/2024 and received by us on 30/04/2024.
3. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in not granting credit of TDS amounting to Rs 29,880.
4. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in raising demand of Rs 7,445.
5. Your appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend all or any of the above grounds of appeal as may be advised from time to time.”
A.Y. 2022-23 “1. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in points of law and facts. to 328/Ahd/2025 Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust, A.Y. 2020-21 to 2023-24 2. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that appeal was filed late and therefore, he did not condone alleged delay. It is submitted that appeal was filed in time. Appeal was filed on 29/05/2024 against rejection of our grievance on 23/04/2024 and received by us on 30/04/2024.
3. In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in not granting credit of TDS amounting to Rs 41,697.
In law and in facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in raising demand of Rs 8,692.
Your appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend all or any of the above grounds of appeal as may be advised from time to time.”
The assessee filed return of income on 24-10-2020 declaring total income at Rs. 3,52,130/- and claimed refund of Rs. 30,026/-. The intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act was passed on 21-10-2021 and the claim for tax deducted at source to Rs. 35,493/- was not allowed. The rectification application u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act was filed on 13-04-2023 for TDS credit of Rs. 35,493/-. The CPGRAM Grievance Application was filed on 11-04-2024 by the assessee and the CPGRAM Grievance Application was closed on 23-04-2024 and the assessee’s claim for credit to TDS to the extent of Rs. 35,493/- was rejected and demand of Rs. 5470/- was raised.
4. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the assessee filed appeal against the intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 21-10-2021 before the CIT(A) on 29-05- 2024. Thus, the CIT(A) observed that there is a delay of 919 to 328/Ahd/2025 Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust, A.Y. 2020-21 to 2023-24 days in filing the appeal. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay as well as observing that the closure of CPGRAM is not an appealable order. The assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal.
5. The trustee has filed the application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal which is delayed by 104 days thereby stating that the trustee forgot to submit the order of the CIT(A) to the chartered accountant of the trust. Since the delay before the Tribunal has been explained by the assessee trust and it appears genuine, hence the delay is condoned.
The ld. A.R. submitted that the rectification application was made within the stipulated time i.e. on 13-04-2023 as during the covet period, the Hon’ble Apex Court has directed to exclude the period of limitation due to Covid till 28th Feb, 2022. The ld. A.R. submitted that the order for CPGRAM Grievance Application was closed on 23-04-2024 in respect of rectification application, therefore assessee trust has rightly filed the appeal within the stipulated time before the CIT(A). The ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee be given credit of TDS of Rs. 35,493/- as the TDS deducted amounting to Rs. 35,493/- is reflected in the name of Hasmukhbhai S Dave who is a trustee of the trust and TDS was not claimed by Hasmukhbhai S Dave for assessment year 2020-21. The copy of Form 26AS of Hasmukhbhai S Dave was attached to the rectification application dated 23- 01-2023 and submitted to the Assessing Officer. Since the to 328/Ahd/2025 Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust, A.Y. 2020-21 to 2023-24 Assessing Officer has not passed rectification order and simply closed the case of the assessee, the matter may be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for considering the assessee trust’s claim that credit of TDS should be given in the name of the trust. The ld. A.R. further submitted that the CIT(A) instead of remanding back the matter to the Assessing Officer and directing the Assessing Officer to consider assessee trust’s claim, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order/intimation u/s. 143(1), CPGRAM disposed of the order dated 23-04-2024.
We heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to the note that the CIT(A) has not commented anything on the merits of the case related to the refund in respect of TDS credit to the assessee trust. The rectification application filed by the assessee on 08-02-2023 was not rejected or accepted by the Assessing Officer. On 23-04-2024, the CPGRAM disposed of the complaint of the assessee trust dated 11-04-2024 thereby stating the case ‘closed’. It will be appropriate that the matter may be remanded back to the Assessing Officer with the direction that if the credit of TDS is in the name of trustee and the trust being given the details whether money are credited by trustee into the account of the trust, the same should be taken into account and the due credit to the to 328/Ahd/2025 Urmilaben H. Dave Disc Family Trust, A.Y. 2020-21 to 2023-24 assessee trust be given accordingly. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
All the three appeals are identical in facts and therefore the direction passed in 2020-21 be followed in subsequent assessment years 2021-22 and 2022-23 being and 328/Ahd/2025.
In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30-05-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 30/05/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद