CHRYSALIS PLAY SCHOOL PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3586/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 February 2026AY 2022-23Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member), Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer denied TDS credit pertaining to an amalgamated entity. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for verification of the TDS credit.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 273 days. The assessee had filed a return of income for AY 2022-23, and after amalgamation with other companies, filed a revised return under Section 170A. The Assessing Officer passed an order determining tax liability, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, confirming the AO's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the TDS credit pertaining to amalgamated entities is allowable and whether the matter should be remanded for verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 143(1),Section 170A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 27.01.2026Pronounced: 02.02.2026

Year: 2022-23 Chrysalis Play School Private Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 12, South Mada Street, Srinagar Income Tax, Colony, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015. Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai. [PAN: AAICC2959D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Y. Sudarshan, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 27.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 02.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad for the assessment year 2022-23.

2.

We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 273 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, in 2 the interest of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

At the outset, we note that the assessee filed return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] on 06.10.2022 admitting a total income of ₹.37,31,961/- for AY 2022-23 and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 24.02.2023. Thereafter, the companies Royalsoft Services Limited [PAN: AAACX0016E] and Amaryllis Properties Private Limited [PAN; AAJCA4663M] got amalgamated with the assessee vide NCLT order dated 06.04.2022. Thereafter, the assessee filed return of income under section 170A of the Act on 15.03.2023 declaring total income of ₹.37,31,960/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer passed giving effect order under section 170A r.w.s. 143(1) of the Act dated 30.12.2023 determining sum of ₹.3,78,558/- as payable towards tax liability. Since the assessee did not file any documentary evidence in support of its contention towards TDS credit, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

4.

The ld. AR Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate submits that the Assessing Officer denied TDS credit of ₹.3,30,000/- pertaining to one of the amalgamated entities M/s. Amaryllis Properties Pvt. Ltd. The ld. AR prayed to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of TDS credit by filing various details in the form of paper book containing 238 pages. Considering the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the TDS credit pertaining to the amalgamated entities M/s. Amaryllis Properties Pvt. Ltd. and pass order in accordance with law by affording an opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to furnish documentary evidence in support of its claim before the Assessing Officer. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →