SANJIV KUMAR BALESHWAR SINGH PUNDIR,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5873/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 November 2019AY 2012-135 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish original certificates, and the Assessing Officer was instructed to examine them and decide the issue after providing a fair opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction of prepaid taxes of Rs. 2,44,868/- under Section 90/91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for income earned from CSC India Pvt Ltd. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim due to a lack of proper evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to a deduction for prepaid taxes under Section 90/91 without providing original evidence of tax relief.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 91

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA

For Appellant: Shri Karan Jain, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.11.2019Pronounced: 19.11.2019

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 1, Noida dated 23.02.2017 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing the deductions of prepaid taxes of Rs. 2,44,868/- claimed by the assessee on account of no proper evidences for the tax relief claimed u/s 90/91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'].

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that return of income was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS. While scrutinizing the return of income, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has shown income from salary at Rs. 24.21 lakhs from CSC India Pvt Ltd. and claimed relief u/s 90/91 of the Act for Rs. 2,36,563/-. Since no information/evidence regarding relief u/s 90/91 has been furnished, the same was disallowed.

4.

The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but could furnish only photocopies of the certificates. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the contention of the assessee by holding that the photocopies of the documents claimed to be that of the Government of United Kingdom is not admissible as evidence.

5.

Before me, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the certificates had to come from United Kingdom and the assessee was not in a position to produce the original certificates. But now that those certificates are available, the same can be verified.

6.

I have carefully considered the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee. In the interest of justice and fair play, I restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to furnish all the certificates in original. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the same and decide the issue afresh after giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I order accordingly.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 19.11.2019.

More judgments on Section 90

All 1,075 judgments and leading authorities on Section 90 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →