S B DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 19.09.2024, passed by the CIT(A)-6, Chennai for Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1.0
The CIT(A) ought to have held that intimation prepared by the assessing officer i.e. Dy. Commissioner of Income tax CPC, Ahmedabad is bad in law. The Intimation has been prepared mechanically without application of mind and ignoring the facts and submissions. The intimation is outside purview of provisions of section 143(1)(1). The intimation be quashed.
1.1
The denial of credit of TDS of Rs.4,61,846/- is not permissible while preparing Intimation under section 143(1). The adjustment does not fall within any of the clause under section 143(1)
2.0
The CIT(A) ought to have held that the assessing officer erred in not allowing credit in respect of tax deducted at source of Rs.18,44,033/- being tax deducted at source as per 26AS and provisions of section 199
Assessment Year: 2023-24
and also rule 37BA. The AO be directed to allow credit of tax deducted at source of Rs.18,44,033/-
2.1
The appellant submits that under the facts and the law the appellant is entitled to credit of Rs.18,44,033/-. The appellant submits that the AO has committed an error of law and error of fact in allowing credit of the TDS only at Rs.13,82,167/-. The appellant submits that it be so held now.
2.2
The appellant without prejudice to above submits that application of Rule
37BA has been erroneously applied by the assessing officer. The appellant submits that it be so held now.
Your appellant prays for leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw all or any of the grounds of appeal before the final hearing of the appeal.
3. The assessee is engaged in the business of construction and sale of immovable property and filed its original return of income on 12.10.2023 at a total income of Rs1,10,85,830/-. The assessee paid taxes to the tune of Rs.40,04,033/- of which TDS has been claimed of Rs.18,44,033/-. The same was processed by the DDIT, CPC vide intimation order under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated
09.01.2024 wherein DDIT, CPC restricted the claim of TDS to the extent of Rs.13,82,187/- as per Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The CPC has restricted the said TDS credit with the remark that the gross receipts shown in Form
No.26AS are higher than the total of the receipts offered to the tax under various heads in the return.
4. Aggrieved by the short credit of TDS, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
5. There is a delay of 5 days in filing the present appeal. The same is condoned.
At the time of hearing, the assessee filed adjournment application, the same is rejected.
6. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order as well as the order of the CIT(A).
7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that prima facie it appears that the Assessing Officer has not allowed credit in respect of tax deducted at source of Rs.18,44,033/- as per 26AS and which is in consonance with the provisions of Section 191 of the Act and also as Assessment Year: 2023-24
PBN/*
Copies to:
(1)
The appellant
(2)
The respondent

(3)
CIT

(4)
CIT(A)

(5)
Departmental Representative

(6)
Guard File

By order