KARUNASHANKER RAMCHANDRA SELOT,MUMBAI vs. ITO-34(1)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 564/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 July 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON'BLE (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 held that credit for taxes paid should be allowed to the tax-payer. They directed the AO to allow the credit of tax paid after verification, despite the omission in the original return.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the denial of credit for advance tax paid. Form 26AS reflected an advance tax payment of Rs. 2,06,000/- deposited on 22/03/2011. The Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A) denied this credit because it was not claimed in the original return of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to credit for advance tax paid when it was not claimed in the original return of income?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, A/R

Hearing: 03/07/2024Pronounced: 03/07/2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore, dt. 19/12/2023 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer (AO) for non- granting of credit of advance tax paid.

Having heard rival submissions, we have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. A perusal of Form 26AS downloaded from the IT portal show advance payment of Rs.2,06,000/- is reflected and the date of deposit is 22/03/2011. This credit was denied by the AO and the ld. CIT(A) for the simple reason that the same was not claimed in the original return of income filed. Assessment Year: 2011-12 Karunashanker Ramchandra Selot 2

Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that the credit for taxes paid should be allowed to the tax-payer. Therefore, we direct the AO to allow the credit of tax paid after verification.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 3rd July, 2024 at Mumbai. (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 03/07/2024 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs

आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""थ" / The Respondent 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 3. आयकर आयु" अपील

( ) / The CIT(A)- िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 5. गाड" फाई/ Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →