Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (4) TMI 1046

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he brief facts of the case are that the appellant firm is engaged in the sale of stage lighting & stage furnishing equipment. The appellant's assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on the returned income of Rs. 61,43,000/-. The appellant claimed credit for TDS of Rs. 24,81,348/- in its Return of Income (ROI). However, the AO found that credit for TDS of Rs. 17,30,832/- was wrongly claimed as the income corresponding to this TDS was accounted for by one of the sister concerns of the appellant, namely; M/s Modern Stage Services (P) Ltd. Accordingly, the AO did not allow the claim for credit of TDS observing as under: "It was admitted by assessee that the payment had been made to Modern Stage Services Pvt. Ltd. and the TDS certificate had be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have got it corrected by asking such deductor to furnish a simple correction statement. The assessee instead of getting the matter sorted out and correcting the form 16A deliberately & knowingly claimed credit of other person's TDS in its name which was patently wrong and not permissible under the law. If the income had been booked by the M/s Modern Stage Services Pvt. Ltd. , then the credit of TDS could only be allowed to them and not to assessee. In view of this, the credit of TDS of Rs. 17,30,832/- was withdrawn and the assessee was liable to pay tax on account of this withdrawal. The assessee did so advertently to avoid incidence of tax due." 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... submitted that the liability of the assessee is to offer all credits/receipts as its income and claiming tax credit of other person is legally unacceptable. The Ld. DR further submitted that even if any mistake had occurred at the level of deductors, the assessee could have got it corrected by asking such deductors to furnish a simple correction statement. The assessee instead of getting the matter sorted out & rectfying form 16A, deliberately & knowingly claimed credit of the TDS of other persons in its name which was patently wrong and not permissible under the law. It was submitted that if the income had been booked by M/s Modern Stage Services Pvt. Ltd., then the credit of TDS could only be allowed to them and not to assessee. In view .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anation offered is not substantiated and bonafide is not proved. Explanation 1 of 271(l)(c) enacts the rule of evidence whereby the onus is on the assessee and if he fails to discharge the burden the presumption of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income can be drawn. Such presumption is to be discharged by "cogent, reliable and relevant materials" as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. K. R. Sadayappan 185 ITR 49. It is the assessee's contention is that it has wrongly claimed credit of TDS of M/s Modern Stage Services (P) Ltd. on the fact that the deductors have issued TDS certificates in its name because of the similarity in the names of the two along with some common shareholders and partners. In our consider .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... med as 'the amount of tax sought to be evaded' as defined in Explanation-4 to section 271(1)(c). Therefore, after considering the conspectus of the material on record and the rival submissions, we are of the considered view that the presumption of concealment as contained in explanation (1) of section 271(l)(c) read with the explanation (4) of section 271(l)(c) has been rebutted by the assessee and that all the facts relating to this explanation and material to the computation of total income have been duly disclosed. Under the circumstances, it is held that explanation of the appellant was bona-fide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of total income have been duly disclosed by it. Accordingly, we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates