Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd., claimed TDS credit for Assessment Years 2016-17 to 2019-20. The Assessing Officer did not grant the full TDS credit of Rs.220,61,47,656/- as reflected in the latest Form 26AS, a discrepancy attributed to late filing of TDS returns by customers. The CIT(A) directed the AO to grant the full credit, which the revenue subsequently appealed to the ITAT.
Held
The ITAT upheld the decision of the CIT(A), affirming that there was no error in granting the full TDS credit as reflected in the latest Form 26AS. The tribunal noted that the revenue failed to present any contrary material to dispute that the shortfall was due to late TDS return filings by customers and that the corresponding income had been offered to tax. The decision was consistent with a previous ruling by a coordinate bench in the assessee's own case on similar facts.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) correctly directed the AO to grant full TDS credit as per Form 26AS, even if the credit appeared after the initial ITR filing, due to late filing of TDS returns by customers, and without specifically verifying if the corresponding income was offered to tax.
Sections Cited
Income Tax Act, 1961, 250, 143(3), 147, 148, 36(1)(viia)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY,
आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM):
All these 4 appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the different orders of ld. CIT(A) NFAC passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2016-17 to 2019-20. Since similar issue on identical facts are involved in these cases, therefore for the sake of convenience all these appeals are adjudicated together by this common order by taking as a lead case and its finding will be applied mutatis mutandis to the other 3 appeals wherever it is applicable.
P a g e | 2 & 3567, 4409 & 4410/Mum/2023 DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1) Vs. M/s L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd.
“1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to give credit of TDS, which appeared in 26AS subsequent to filing of ITR by assessee, without giving finding that the corresponding income has been offered to tax by the assessee or without directing AO to verify the same. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.
The appellant craves leave to amend, or alter any grounds or add a new ground, which may be necessary.”
Fact in brief is that assessee L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd. has filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs.375,12,55,660/- on 15.10.2016. The assessee provides financial products and services to its customers engaged in infrastructure development and construction. In this case assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 27.12.2018 determining total income at Rs.3,75,74,80,410/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31.03.2021 on the issue of excessive deduction claimed u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Act 1961. In its original and revised return of income the assesse has claimed TDS credit amounting to Rs.208,68,35,381/-. Subsequently, in the return filed pursuant to notice u/s 148 the assessee has claimed TDS credit of Rs.219,85,92,158/-. However, the AO-NFAC has not granted TDS credit of Rs.220,61,47,656/- as reflected in latest Form No. 26AS.
3. The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) to grant full credit of TDS based on the amount shown in the latest Form No. 26AS. The ld. CIT(A) held that assessee should be granted total TDS credit of Rs.220,61,47,656/- as reflected in the latest Form 26AS.
P a g e | 3 & 3567, 4409 & 4410/Mum/2023 DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1) Vs. M/s L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd.
Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. During the course of appellate proceedings before us at the outset the ld. Counsel submitted that identical issue on similar fact has been adjudicated by the coordinate bench of the ITAT, Mumbai in favour of the assessee vide dated 30.10.2023 in the case of The DCIT-14(1)(1) Vs. L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd. and the shortfall in grant of TDS credit was due to late filing of TDS return by various customer because of which the relevant credit did not reflect in Form No. 26AS for the relevant period. The assessee has also enclosed annexure of detail of tax deducted at source by the various parties and also filed copies of profit and loss account for the year ended 31.03.2016 and balance sheet as on 31.03.2016. The assessee has also filed detail of revenue as per the return of income filed in ITR-6 to the amount of Rs.24,36,15,08,699/- compared to revenue as per Form No. 26AS to the amount of Rs.22,24,70,42,263/- which demonstrate that total income as per return of income was more than the amount reflected in the Form No. 26AS. The revenue has not brought any contrary material to disprove the aforesaid material fact that shortfall in grant of TDS credit was only due to late filing of TDS returns by various customers because of which the relevant credit did not reflect in the Form No. 26AS. We have also perused the decision of ITAT in the case of the assessee itself on the same issue on similar fact in the case of The DCIT-14(1)(1) Vs. L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd. as discussed supra. The relevant part of the decision is reproduced as under: “13. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 relate to the short granting of the credit. From the facts, we find that as per the revised return of income, the assessee has claimed TDS credit of Rs.168,45,14,220/-. However, the Learned Assessing Officer granted the credit of only Rs.136,06,39,690/-. In Form No.26AS, later on, because of late deposit of TDS by some of the customers, a further incremental TDS credit of Rs.5,60,33,885/- was reflected. The Learned CIT-A held that the credit available in Form No.26As should have been granted by the Learned Assessing Officer. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Learned CIT- A in granting the total credit of TDS of Rs.174,05,48,105/-. It is not the case of P a g e | 4 & 3567, 4409 & 4410/Mum/2023 DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1) Vs. M/s L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd.
the Revenue that the income comprising the TDS has not been offered by the assessee in its income in the impugned assessment year. Accordingly, we confirm the order of the Learned CIT-A on this issue and dismiss ground Nos.1 and 2 of the appeal of the Revenue.”
Considering material on record as discussed supra in this order, we don’t find any error in the decision of ld. CIT(A) in granting TDS credit of Rs.220,61,47,656/- Therefore, following the decision of ITAT as referred supra, we don’t find any infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
The appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
Since we have adjudicated the similar issue on identical facts vide while adjudicating the appeal of the Revenue for A.Y. 2016-17 as supra in this order therefore applying the same finding as mutatis mutandis to ITA No.4409/Mum/2023, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Since we have adjudicated the similar issue on identical facts vide while adjudicating the appeal of the Revenue for A.Y. 2016-17 as supra in this order therefore applying the same finding as mutatis mutandis to ITA No.3566/Mum/2023, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Since we have adjudicated the similar issue on identical facts vide while adjudicating the appeal of the Revenue for A.Y. 2016-17 as supra in this order therefore applying the same finding as mutatis mutandis to Revenue is also dismissed.
P a g e | 5 & 3567, 4409 & 4410/Mum/2023 DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1) Vs. M/s L & T Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd.
In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05.07.2024
Sd/- Sd/- (Rahul Chaudhary) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 05.07.2024 Rohit: PS आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��थ� / The Respondent. 2. आयकर आयु� / CIT 3. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण DR, ITAT, 4. Mumbai गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 5. स�ािपत �ित //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,