BHAJAN LAL,SIRSA vs. ITO WARD - 1 , SIRSA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1151/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 November 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since TDS was deducted against the assessee's payment and it was the assessee's money that was deducted, the credit for the TDS is allowable to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, acting as a commission agent (Kaccha Arhtia), appealed against the denial of TDS credit of Rs. 42,726/-. The CIT(A) denied the credit, citing that TDS certificates were not issued in the assessee's name, despite the assessee being the one whose money was deducted.

What were the issues?

Whether TDS credit is allowable to a commission agent when TDS has been deducted on gross receipts not belonging to the agent, but on their behalf.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 37BA(2),Section 194Q

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Bhajan Lal ITO Ward-1, Sirsa बनाम/ Vs. 94-B, Anaj Mandi, Ellenabad, Sector-20, HUDA Sirsa, Haryana-125102 Sirsa, Haryana-125055 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAJPL-4163-A (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Kartik Garg (CA) (Virtual) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 25-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 25-11-2025 : आदेश / O R D E R

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2022- 23 arises out of an order of Ld. Addl. / JCIT (Appeal), Pune dated 19- 08-2025 in the matter of a rectification order passed by CPC u/s 154 on 05-05-2023 denying TDS credit of Rs. 42,726/- as claimed by the assessee. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

2.

It could be seen that Ld. CIT(A) has denied the credit by invoking Rule 37BA(2) since the assessee acted as commission agent and carried out sales on behalf of its principals. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld denial of TDS credit on the ground that the assessee ought to have got TDS certificates issued in the name of his clients.

3.

From assessee’s pleadings, it could be seen that the assessee has acted as Kaccha Arhtia. The assessee receives payment from traders on behalf of the farmers against commission income. The commission receipts become the income of the assessee. However, few of the traders have deducted TDS u/s 194Q against gross receipts which are not the receipts for the assessee. These receipts would never be offered as revenue receipts. Nevertheless, TDS has been deducted against assessee’s payment and it is the assessee’s money which has been deducted by the traders. Therefore, the credit of the same would certainly be available to the assessee. Therefore, I direct Ld. AO to grant impugned TDS credit of Rs.42,726/-.

4.

The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 25th November, 2025.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →