SOHAN LAL,ANAJ MANDI, LADWA vs. ITO, WARD 2, KURUKSHETRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 524/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 October 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the revenue could not point out the specific reason for denial of the TDS claim. In similar cases, the matter has been restored to the Assessing Officer. Hence, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) denying the claim of TDS amounting to Rs. 1.68 lacs. The assessee claimed to have furnished Form 16A and Form 26AS, but the benefit of TDS was not given while processing the return.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to the TDS claim when the revenue could not provide specific reasons for denial and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ, च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘SMC’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Sohan Lal, बनाम The ITO, MSSohan Lal Mohan Lal, Ward 2, Shop No. 46,New Anaj Kurukshetra Mandi, Ladwa, Kurukshetra �थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAPFL3410N अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) Assessee by : Shri Varun Gupta ,Advocate (Virtual) Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 27.10.2025 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025 आदेश/Order

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2022- 23.

524 -Chd-2025 Sohan Lal, Kurukshetra 2

2.

The Assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities in denying the claim of TDS amounting to Rs. 1.68 lacs.

3.

At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the Assessee had duly furnished the relevant form 16A and form 26AS to show that the TDS was duly deducted by the purchaser. However, the Assessee has not been given the benefit of the claim of TDS while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

4.

The ld. DR also could not specifically point out the reason for denial of claim of TDS deduction out of the receipts of the Assessee. She has submitted that in identical case, the matter has been restored by the Tribunal to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the TDS deduction.

5.

In view of this, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the claim of 524 -Chd-2025 Sohan Lal, Kurukshetra 3 TDS made by the Assessee and if found admissible, allow the claim accordingly.

6.

The appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 31.10.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →