RAMESHKUMAR VELJIBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ADDL JOINT CIT (A)-8 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1830/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 September 2024AY 2020-2021Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Judicial Member, Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the lower authorities did not verify the TDS details reflected in Form 26AS. The Tribunal directed the assessee to furnish Form 16A and a reconciliation statement to the AO for verification. It was also directed that not providing tax credit for TDS deducted is against the law.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Rameshkumar Veljibhai Patel, an individual, worked for Ambition Mica Ltd. and drew a salary of Rs. 45,00,000 for AY 2020-21. TDS of Rs. 12,15,000 was deducted by the employer. The assessee filed a revised return claiming TDS credit, which was disallowed by CPC, leading to a demand. The CIT(A)/NFAC rejected the appeal, stating mere TDS deduction does not entitle credit.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to claim TDS credit when the same is reflected in 26AS, and if lower authorities have erred by summarily rejecting the claim without verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 139(5),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “J (SMC

Before: Smt. Beena Pillai, & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

For Respondent: Ms. Deepika Arora (Sr.DR)
Hearing: 12.09.2024Pronounced: 17.09.2024

O R D E R

PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM :

1.

The present appeal arises out of the order dated 4th March, 2024 passed by NFAC Mumbai for A.Y. 2020-21 on following grounds of appeal.

1. The Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-8 Mumbai has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal and not allowing the credit of tax deducted by employer from the salary. Therefore, your appellant prays to allow the credit of TDS deducted on salary by the employer company.

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1830/Mum/2024

2.

Your appellant craves leave to add, alter amend, add / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal.” Brief facts of the case are as under: 2. 2.1 The assessee is an individual and was working with Ambition Mica Ltd. and drew salary income of Rs.45,00,000/- for the year under consideration. It is submitted that, the salary was subjected to TDS by the employer and TDS was collected amounting to Rs.12,15,000/-. 2.2 The assessee filed return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act on 10.02.2021 for year under consideration and was subsequently revised under Section 139(5) on 13.02.2021. In the revised return, the assessee offered total income of Rs.43,26,350/- and claimed TDS credit of Rs.12,15,000/-. As a consequence, there was refund of Rs.60,179/- determined by the assessee. The CPC while processing the said revised return issued intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act on 20.03.2021 wherein the credit of TDS claimed by the assessee amounting to Rs.12,15,000/- was disallowed and demand of Rs.13,51,720/- was raised. 2.3 In response to the said intimation under Section 143(1), the assessee submitted that the employer deducted the TDS from the salary as per the provisions of the Act which is reflected in 26AS which was not considered and a demand was raised by the CPC. Aggrieved by the intimation under Section 143(1), the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 3.1 During the course of the appellate proceedings, the assessee reiterated that the TDS deducted is reflected in 26AS and no addition

P a g e | 3 could be made in respected of same. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC did not accept the contention of the assessee and rejected the appeal by stating that mere deduction of a TDS amount was not entitled the assessee for credit of the same.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee preferred appeal before this Tribunal.

5. The assessee has filed before this Tribunal a letter dated 09.09.2024 stating that the case may be decided on the basis of the grounds of appeal and the written submission filed by the assessee. For the sake of convenience, the letter is scanned herewith.

4.2 On the contrary, the ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the authorities below.

We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides.

P a g e | 4 ITA No.1830/Mum/2024

5.

From the written submission filed by the assessee placed at pages 1 to 4 of the paper book, it is noted that, the assessee had worked for 9 months in the company from April 2019 to December 2019 and drew total salary of Rs.45 lakh on which TDS of Rs.12,15,000/- was deducted by the employer. The assessee has enclosed the salary slips issued by the employer at pages 13 to 21 of the paper book. 8. It is also noted at page 10 of the paper book Form 26AS has been placed. We note that the authorities below have not verified these details and have summarily rejected the claim of assessee. However, we direct the assessee to furnish Form 16A and a reconciliation statement to support the claim before the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO is directed to verify all these details and consider the claim of assessee in accordance with law. It is also directed that not providing the tax credit to the assessee in respect of TDS that has been deducted is not in accordance with law. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.09.2024

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 →