2025 (3) TMI 592 - AT - Income Tax

Denial of credit for TDS - application of provisions of Section 238(1) - HELD THAT - From the evidence filed by the assessee there is no dispute that the profit or loss from the contracts on which TDS has been deducted u/s 194C of the Act and remitted in the name of the assessee has been considered in the hands of the assessee alone and not in the hands of the constituent partners as alleged by the AO. AO merely because the assessee has transferred the gross contract receipts on back to back basis to constituent partners has assumed that the profit from such contracts is also transferred to the constituent partners. However the fact remains that the said profit or loss should be understood in the context of the nature of the business carried out by the particular assessee. In the present case the assessee has followed a method whereby the gross contract receipts have been considered as its income and the back-to-back payments made to constituent partners as its expenses and therefore from the above project the assessee has reported a nil profit. However it does not mean that the assessee has not reported any profit or loss from the project. Therefore we are of the considered view that going by the provisions of Section 238(1) of the Act and facts of the present case the Assessing Officer is completely erred in invoking Section 238(1) of the Act to deny the credit for TDS to the assessee. Assessee itself has disclosed the relevant profit or loss from the above contract in its hands and also claimed corresponding TDS deducted in terms of Section 199(1) of the Act and Rule 37BA(1) of the I.T. Rules 1962. Further as per Section 199(1) of the Act any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as payment of tax on behalf of the person in whose name the deduction was made and in the present case going by the facts available on record there is no dispute with regard to the fact that NFR has deducted TDS on the payment made to the assessee and also remitted TDS to the Central Government account in the name of the assessee which is evident from Form 26AS filed by the assessee. As per Rule 37BA(1) of I.T. Rules 1962 it is abundantly clear that credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government account shall be given to the person to whom payment has been made or credit has been given. Since the payment has been made to the assessee and credit has been given to the assessee towards TDS deducted on gross contract receipts in our considered view the assessee alone is eligible to claim credit for TDS in accordance with Section 199(1) and Rule 37BA(1) of the I.T. Rules 1962. Therefore AO and CIT(A) have erred in withdrawing the TDS credit claimed by the assessee in the return of income filed for the impugned assessment year. Assessee has rightly claimed credit for TDS deducted by NFR and remitted to the Central Government in the name of the assessee and said claim is in accordance with Section 199(1) of the Act and Rule 37BA(1) of I.T. Rules 1962. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered in this judgment are:

1. Whether the assessee, a Joint Venture (JV) constituted by Hindustan Construction Company Limited (HCCL) and Costal Projects Ltd (CPL), is entitled to claim credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on the gross contract receipts received from North-East Frontier Railway (NFR) under Section 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.

2. Whether the provisions of Section 238(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which stipulate that if the income of one person is included in the total income of another person, the latter alone shall be entitled to a refund, are applicable in the present case.

3. Whether the assessee's distribution of contract receipts to its constituent partners affects its eligibility to claim TDS credit.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Entitlement to TDS Credit

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents:

The relevant legal provisions include Section 199(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which states that TDS shall be treated as payment of tax on behalf of the person in whose name the deduction was made. Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, governs the manner of granting credit for tax deducted at source.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning:

The Tribunal interpreted that Section 199(1) and Rule 37BA(1) clearly indicate that credit for TDS should be granted to the person to whom the payment has been made or in whose name credit has been given. Since NFR made the payment to the assessee and credited the TDS in its name, the assessee is eligible for the TDS credit.

Key Evidence and Findings:

The assessee accounted for the gross contract receipts from NFR as its income and treated the payments to constituent partners as expenses, thereby reporting nil profit. The TDS was deducted by NFR and credited to the Central Government in the name of the assessee.

Application of Law to Facts:

The Tribunal applied Section 199(1) and Rule 37BA(1) to conclude that the assessee is entitled to claim the TDS credit because the deduction was made in its name and reported as such.

Treatment of Competing Arguments:

The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument that the income was assessable in the hands of the constituent partners, and thus, they should claim the TDS credit. The Tribunal found that the assessee reported the income and expenses in its books, and the TDS was deducted in its name.

Conclusions:

The Tribunal concluded that the assessee is entitled to claim the TDS credit of Rs. 5,20,58,733 as per Section 199(1) and Rule 37BA(1).

Issue 2: Applicability of Section 238(1)

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents:

Section 238(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provides that if the income of one person is included in the total income of another, the latter alone is entitled to a refund.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning:

The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer misinterpreted Section 238(1) by assuming that the income was assessable in the hands of the constituent partners. The Tribunal noted that the assessee reported the income in its books, and the TDS was deducted in its name.

Key Evidence and Findings:

The Tribunal examined the financial statements and tax returns of the assessee, which showed that the income was reported by the assessee, not the constituent partners.

Application of Law to Facts:

The Tribunal applied Section 238(1) and determined that it was not applicable, as the income was not included in the total income of any other person.

Treatment of Competing Arguments:

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's reliance on Section 238(1), as the income was not included in the income of the constituent partners.

Conclusions:

The Tribunal concluded that Section 238(1) does not apply, and the assessee is entitled to the TDS credit.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

The Tribunal established the principle that when TDS is deducted and credited in the name of the assessee, the assessee is entitled to claim the credit, provided the income is reported in its books, irrespective of the distribution of contract receipts to constituent partners.

Verbatim Quote:

"In view of the provisions contained in section 238 and 199 of the Act and Rule 37BA of the Rules, it is clear beyond any doubt that the assessee JV cannot be granted credit of the TDS amount claimed by it in its ITR."

Core Principles Established:

The Tribunal reinforced that TDS credit should be granted to the entity in whose name the deduction is made and reported, aligning with Section 199(1) and Rule 37BA(1).

Final Determinations:

The Tribunal set aside the order of the LD.CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the credit for TDS amounting to Rs. 5,20,58,733 to the assessee.