SACHIN GOVIND KELKAR,PUNE vs. CIT (A), PUNE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :
This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2022-23,
arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata, Kolkata’s Din and
Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1060031872(1), dated
23.01.2024, in proceedings u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act,
1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
The assessee pleads the following substantive
grounds in the instant appeal :
“The Assessing Officer/CPC erred in law and on facts
while processing the return of income and providing the
2 ITA.No.546/PUN./2024
intimation under section 143(1) of the Act and denial of
TDS credit and raising the demand of Rs.2,69,430/-.
The Assessing Officer/ CPC erred in law in not allowing
the credit of TDS in the name of the HUF of the Appellant's
deceased uncle, though the Appellant who is the legal heir
of the property of the HUF and also offered the income
from the property to tax while filing the return of income.
The Assessing officer erred in not considering the facts as
inherited property belongs to the Appellant and hence, the
Appellant also offered the income from the property to tax
in his return of income. Merely because the TDS is
appearing in the HUF's PAN, the credit of the same cannot
be denied.
Under the present case, the said disallowance is arbitrary,
unjustified, and unwarranted and needs to be deleted.
The intimation passed by the Assessing Officer/ CPC does
not given the full details of the TDS unmatched and hence
the same is bad in law and devoid of any merits.
The Assessing Officer erred in levy of interest under
section 234A, 234B and 234 C of the Act and the same is
not justified.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend,
modify and or delete any or all of the grounds of appeal
mentioned herein above.”
3 ITA.No.546/PUN./2024
It next emerges with the able assistance coming
from both the parties that the main issue herein of the alleged
mismatch in TDS credit resulting in demand of Rs.2,69,430/;
more requires a factual re-conciliation than this tribunal’s
detailed adjudication u/sec.254(1) of the Act. The assessee has
indeed sought to make-out a case based on mitigating
circumstances in the instant appeal that since there are
various inconsistencies qua the instant issue involving the
issue of TDS credit in the HUF as well as individual’s case; the
matter be sent back to the Field Authorities for their afresh
detailed examination.
We thus find force in the assessee’s instant sole
substantive arguments in principle and direct the learned
Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata to re-adjudicate the matter afresh in
tune with sec.250(6) of the Act so as to arrive at the assessee’s
impugned TDS credit as per law, within three effective
opportunities of hearing at his own risk and responsibility.
Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.08.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 28th August, 2024 VBP/-
4 ITA.No.546/PUN./2024
Copy to
The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File.
//By Order//
//True Copy //
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.
