2019 (1) TMI 1612 - HC - Income Tax

Credit of TDS on the basis of evidences produced for deduction of tax at source - deductor has not issued TDS certificates or had failed to uphold the correct details in Form 26AS - HELD THAT - Tribunal with the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties, we notice that the Revenue had objected to the assessee's claim of Tax Deducted at Source (for short TDS ) from the payments made to the assessee on the ground that, there was mismatch in the TDS certificate issued by the deductors and the aggregate amounts arrived at as appearing in form 26A. The Tribunal referred to and relied on the decision of this Court in case of Yashpal Sahni 2007 (7) TMI 7 - HIGH COURT , BOMBAY and observed that, in case, the deductor has failed to upheld the correct details in form 26A the benefit should be given to the assesssee on the basis of evidence produced before the Department. Resultantly, the Tribunal only directed the Assessing Officer to verify the correct facts and give credit of TDS to the assessee. No question of law arises.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) provisions.
2. Mismatch in TDS certificates and Form 26AS.
3. Judicial precedent on giving credit of TDS based on evidence produced.

Analysis:
1. The main issue in this case was the interpretation of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) provisions. The Revenue appealed against a judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, questioning whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to give credit of TDS based on evidence produced for deduction of tax at source, even when the deductor had not issued TDS certificates or had failed to provide correct details in Form 26AS.

2. The Tribunal's decision was based on the observation that there was a mismatch in the TDS certificate issued by the deductors and the aggregate amounts shown in Form 26AS. Citing the case of Yashpal Sahni, the Tribunal held that if the deductor failed to provide correct details in Form 26AS, the benefit should still be given to the assessee based on the evidence presented before the Department. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify the facts and credit the TDS to the assessee.

3. The High Court, after perusing the impugned judgment and considering the arguments presented by the parties, found that the Tribunal's decision was in line with judicial precedent and the provisions of the law. The Court noted that no question of law arose from the Tribunal's decision, and as a result, both the Appeals were dismissed. The judgment reaffirmed the principle that the correct facts should be verified, and credit of TDS should be given to the assessee based on the evidence provided, even in cases where there are discrepancies in TDS certificates and Form 26AS.