9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 472 - AT - Income TaxCredit of TDS self assessment tax as reflected in Form 26AS - HELD THAT - As the entry in Form No. 26AS at Sr. No. 1 at ₹ 8,20,307/- of Ashu Mahawar is reduced or cancelled at Sr. No. 3 of the same 26AS and entry at Sr. No. 2 for ₹ 5,53,970/- is taxable. Thus the action of the AO taxing differential amount at ₹ 2,62,930/- based from 26AS is uncalled for. We find force in the contention of the ld.AR of the assessee and inclined to agree that the addition is not required to be made basis on an entry which is subsequently changed / reduced. Further in the intimation u/s 143(1) dated 15.04.2019, the AO has allowed the credit of TDS of ₹ 56,122/- and self assessment tax of ₹ 7,230/- whereas the same was not allowed in the intimation u/s 154 dated 15.06.2019. The fact is that tax of ₹ 56,122/- was deducted from assessee s income and assessee had paid self assessment tax of ₹ 7,230/- which is also verifiable from Form 26AS. We also find that ITAT, Jaipur Bench in case of Shri Amit Mantri Vs. DCIT 2022 (1) TMI 181 - ITAT JAIPUR has held that where assessee has claimed the credit of TDS in the return which is also reflected in Form 26AS, the AO cannot refuse to grant credit of the same on technicalities. In this view of the mater, AO is directed to delete the addition and allow the credit of TDS self assessment tax as reflected in Form 26AS. Thus Ground No. 1 to 3 of the assessee are allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Dismissal of appeal on technical grounds. 3. Addition of ?2,62,930/- under Section 56 of the IT Act, 1961. 4. Non-credit of TDS of ?56,122/- and self-assessment tax of ?7,230/-. 5. Incorrect calculation of interest under Sections 234B and 234C of the IT Act, 1961. 6. Creation of demand of ?1,54,210/- under Section 156 of the IT Act, 1961. Detailed Analysis: 1. Condonation of Delay: The assessee filed an application to condone the delay of 86 days in filing the appeal, citing the death of the assessee's son due to blood cancer and Covid-19 as the reasons. The Tribunal acknowledged the unprecedented situation due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the personal tragedy faced by the assessee. Referring to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, the Tribunal emphasized a liberal approach in condoning delays to ensure substantial justice. Consequently, the delay was condoned. 2. Dismissal of Appeal on Technical Grounds: The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the assessee did not file a copy of the order under Section 143(1) and provided incorrect information in Form 35. The Tribunal found that the intimation under Section 143(1) was indeed an intimation read with Section 154, dated 15-06-2019, and matched the details in Form 35. The Tribunal criticized the CIT(A) for adopting a hyper-technical view and not deciding the appeal on its merits, which was deemed inappropriate. 3. Addition of ?2,62,930/-: The AO added ?2,62,930/- to the assessee's income based on discrepancies between the income declared and Form 26AS. The Tribunal found that the AO incorrectly held the income from other sources as ?8,27,553/- instead of ?5,64,623/-. The Tribunal noted that the effective interest from Ashu Mahawar was ?5,53,970/- after adjusting for a negative entry in Form 26AS. The addition of ?2,62,930/- was deemed uncalled for, and the Tribunal directed the AO to delete this addition. 4. Non-credit of TDS and Self-assessment Tax: The AO did not allow the credit of TDS of ?56,122/- and self-assessment tax of ?7,230/- in the intimation under Section 154. The Tribunal found that these amounts were verifiable from Form 26AS and should have been credited. Citing the ITAT Jaipur Bench's decision in the case of Shri Amit Mantri vs. DCIT, the Tribunal directed the AO to allow the credit of TDS and self-assessment tax as reflected in Form 26AS. 5. Incorrect Calculation of Interest: The assessee contended that the AO made errors in calculating interest under Sections 234B and 234C. The Tribunal noted that these sections are mandatory and consequential, implying that the interest calculation would be adjusted based on the revised income and tax credits. 6. Creation of Demand of ?1,54,210/-: The AO created a demand of ?1,54,210/- under Section 156. Given that the Tribunal allowed the assessee's grounds regarding the addition of income and tax credits, it directed the AO to verify and adjust the demand accordingly. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the addition of ?2,62,930/-, allow the credit of TDS and self-assessment tax, and adjust the interest and demand calculations based on these revisions. The Tribunal emphasized the need for substantial justice over technicalities and procedural errors.
|
