JEEWAN DASS,HARYANA vs. ITO,WARD-1, RANGE 57, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3785/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 December 2024AY 2023-24Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no merit in the lower authorities' action of disallowing the impugned TDS credits. It noted that the CPC's section 143(1) intimation at page 30 clearly showed no disallowance of the assessee's TDS credit. Therefore, all substantive grounds of appeal raised by the assessee were allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2023-24 against the CIT(A)/NFAC order dated 01.07.2024, which upheld the disallowance of various TDS credits under sections 194C, 194H, 194IA, and 194Q. The assessee contended that the CPC's intimation under section 143(1) did not indicate any such disallowance of TDS credit as pointed out by its auditor.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in upholding the disallowance of credit for TDS under sections 194C, 194H, 194IA, and 194Q, especially when the CPC's intimation under section 143(1) showed no such disallowance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 194C,Section 194H,Section 194IA,Section 194Q

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 26.12.2024Pronounced: 26.12.2024

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2023-24, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 01.07.2024 in DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1066299635(1), in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“1. That the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad in law as well as on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the disallowance of credit of TDS of Rs. 3,849/- u/s 194C inspite of the information duly provided in the return of income.

Jeewan Dass 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the disallowance of credit of TDS of Rs. 64,341/- u/s 194H inspite of the information duly provided in the return of income.

4.

That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the disallowance of credit of TDS of Rs. 46,500/- u/s 194IA inspite of the information duly provided in the return of income.

5. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in upholding contention of the CPC that the TDS u/s 194Q of Rs. 23,443/- is not allowable as the appellant has not given details of turnover as kachcha arhatias in the return of income.

6.

That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the disallowance of credit of TDS of Rs. 1,08,733/- as against Rs. 1,38,133/- claimed by the appellant.

7.

The above grounds of appeal

are without prejudice to each other.”

4. It is straightway evident from a perusal of the learned CPC’s section 143(1) intimation at page 30 that there is no disallowance of the assessee’s TDS credit “as indicated by its Auditor” under sub-section (iv) thereof. This being the clinching facts emerges from case file, I find no merit in the learned lower authorities action disallowing the impugned TDS credit to the appellant/assessee. All of his corresponding substantive grounds raised herein succeed in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26/12/2024.

More judgments on Section 194C

All 2,696 judgments and leading authorities on Section 194C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →