SRI. NAGARAJAN RAMACHANDRAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE PR CIT, TRIVANDRUM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोचीन पीठ, कोचीन म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN माननीय �ी सतबीर िसंह गोदारा, �ाियक सद� एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल ,लेखा सद� के सम�। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, A.M

आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.96/Coch/2021 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Nagarajan Ramachandran PCIT TC/7/152/19, Revu, E lane, Thiruvananthapuram. बनाम/ Kattachal Road, Vettamukku, Vs. Thirumala P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695006. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. ACEPR-0668-M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ� की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri M. Rajasekhar (CIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09-11-2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09-11-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee contest validity of revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 as exercised by learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram [PCIT] vide order dated 22-03-2021 against assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 06-12-2018 for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17.

ITA No.96/Coch/2021 - 2 - 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal was proceeded with the able assistance of Ld. CIT-DR who pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. Having considered material on record, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 3. The assessee was assessed u/s. 143(3) on 06-12-2018 accepting returned income. However, the Ld. PCIT held the order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on the ground that the assessee claimed TDS credit of Rs. 9 Lacs which was allowed to the assessee. However, the corresponding income was not returned by him. The amount of TDS was deducted u/s 194-IA by the purchaser of land against capital asset of the firm M/s Aiyappas House. Since the assessee was managing partner of the firm, the title of the land was in the name of the assessee and sale deed was also executed by the assessee. The capital gains were assessed in the hands of the firm. Since the TDS amount was remitted against assessee’s PAN, the respective credit was allowed to the assessee. As per Sec.198, TDS deduction shall be deemed to be income received and as per Sec.56(2)(v), any sum of money received without consideration shall be chargeable to tax under the head Income from Other sources. Since the TDS credit was money received without any consideration, the same was to be included in the income of the assessee and taxed accordingly. Therefore, Ld. AO was directed to verify this fact and redo the assessment after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. From the impugned order, it could also be seen that despite issuance of show cause notice, the assessee did not appear before revisional authority. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

ITA No.96/Coch/2021 - 3 - 4. We find that the issue flagged by Ld. PCIT was not ever examined by Ld. AO. There is nothing on record which would suggest that such a query was even raised by Ld. AO. Therefore, this is a case of no enquiry and accordingly, the revision of the order could not be faulted with. We order so. 5. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 09th November, 2022.

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद� /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochi; िदनांक / Dated : 09-11-2022 EDN/- Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) -NFAC, Delhi 4. The CIT - 5. The DR, ITAT, Cochin 6. Guard File By Order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin