TAC LOGISTICS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 25(3)(5), MUMBAI

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) not allowing TDS credit of ₹ 3,40,950/- on gross receipts which was reflected in 26As.

Briefly stated facts are that as per form No. 26AS, the AO received information that the assessee has made payment to contractors amounting to ₹ 1,63,91,848/- and also made time deposit for an amount of ₹ 5 lacs. The assessee’s case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. The AO completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act by assessing 10% of contract receipts and also making addition of unexplained time deposit under section 69 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred the appeal before CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of assessee. Now, aggrieved assessee is in second appeal before Tribunal.

Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee only requested that credit for TDS of ₹ 3,40,950/- deducted on gross receipt, which is also reflected in Form No. 26 AS should be given. When this was confronted to the learned Departmental Representative, he fairly agreed to the facts. Accordingly, I direct the AO to verify the TDS credit and allow the claim of the assessee as per law. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.