9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... getting credit of ₹ 74,774/- as the said amount was not a lawful amount to the Government and the assessee should not be deprived of the credit of TDS of ₹ 74,774/- for the mistake/delay made by the deductor. In the given circumstances, as the assessee was not having any possibility to revise the return u/s 139(5) of the Act, the only option left with him was to file an application u/s 154 of the Act which he did so; and therefore, ld. Assessing Officer using his inherent power u/s 154 of the Act for amending any mistake apparent on record should have examined the claim of the assessee by verifying the books of accounts of the assessee as well as the relevant ledger accounts wherein the impugned amount on which TDS of ₹ 74,774/- has been deducted, is duly reflected. We also observe that none appeared on behalf of the assessee during the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and we are, therefore, of the view that the matter to be set aside to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to allow the claim of TDS of ₹ 74,774/- after verifying the books of accounts and financial statements with regard to the receipt of reimbursement of expenses on which TDS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred in law and on facts in passing the orders without properly appreciating the fact and that he further erred in grossly ignoring various submissions, explanations and information submitted by the appellant from time to time which ought to have been considered before passing the impugned order. This action of both the authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and therefore deserves to be quashed. 7 Therefore, it is submitted that relief claimed above be allowed and refund of ₹ 74,774/- be granted with interest thereupon as may be thought fit by your honour. 3. The assessee has taken several grounds in its appeal but the main grievance revolves around a single issue, whereby it has challenged the action of CIT(A) in upholding the rejection of rectification application regarding the credit of TDS of ₹ 74,774/-. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company, engaged in marketing of goods. The assessee filed its return on 25.09.2008 declaring total income of ₹ 319.27 lacs. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and the assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed by the Assessing Officer on 13.12.2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 4,11,832/-was duly shown in the Profit loss account. He further submitted that the appellant received the impugned TDS Certificates from the Bodal Chemicals Ltd only in the month of January, 2011 and accordingly the appellant filed an application u/s 154 of the Act on 03.02.2011 (furnished on 04.02.2011) to grant the credit of TDS Certificates of ₹ 74,774/- in view of provisions of Section 155(14) of the Act; however, the ld. Assessing Officer did not grant the TDS credit of ₹ 74,774/- only on the ground that the said TDS Credit of ₹ 74,774/- was not claimed in the return of income. 7.3 The ld. Authorized Representative further submitted that it is an admitted facts that the corresponding income of ₹ 5,77,594/- and ₹ 4,11,832/- is shown in the return of income by the appellant. He contended that in view of Section 155(14) of the Act, where the TDS Certificate is not furnished with the return of income, and if the same is furnished within 2 years from the end of the relevant assessment year in which the income is assessable, the Assessing Officer shall grant TDS credit to the assessee. The only condition for this, however, as per the proviso to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s appeal of the assessee is against the action of ld.CIT(A) in confirming the order of the ld. Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Act, denying the credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of ₹ 74,774/-. From going through the records, we observe that the assessee has not made any claim of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) of ₹ 74,774/-, deducted by deductor M/s. Bodal Chemicals Limited on receipt of reimbursement expenditure. The impugned TDS Certificates were received by the appellant in the month of January, 2011, i.e., almost after the lapse of two years and nine months from the end of the financial year to which it related. The appellant on receiving the TDS Certificates of ₹ 74,774/- in January, 2011, had no time left for revising the return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act as time limit for revising the return expires in one year from the end of the relevant assessment year, i.e., 31st March 2010; and the only option left with the appellant was to file an application u/s 154 of the Act which gives powers to the Assessing Officer to amend any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of Section 143 of the Act within four years from the end of the financial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er under section 263. The Hon ble Karnataka High Court, while adjudicating the issue on the above facts, held as under:- Section 139 deals with return of income. Sub-section (9) of section 139 sets out under what circumstances the return so filed is defective. Explanation to the said provision makes it clear that the tax, if any, claimed to have been deducted or collected at source and the advance tax and tax on self assessment, if any, claimed to have been paid has to accompany the return filed under section 139. If it does not accompany the return under section 139, the return so filed shall be regarded as defective. In other words, in the return filed under section 139, if the assessee is claiming deduction of the tax deducted at source, the said return should accompany the proof of such tax deducted at source. However, proviso to said provision makes it clear that if the person who deducted the tax has not furnished the certificate to the assessee, then only after such valid claim is made, the amount deducted is treated as payment on behalf of person from whose income the deduction was made and credit to the tax is given. If on assessment of the said return filed, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficates issued by M/s. Bodal Chemicals Limited for ₹ 74,774/-. The appellant has submitted before the Assessing Officer that the amount on which TDS of ₹ 74,774/- has been deducted is duly shown in the financial statements submitted by it at the time of filing of return of income. We are, therefore, of the view that the assessee is very much eligible for getting credit of ₹ 74,774/- as the said amount was not a lawful amount to the Government and the assessee should not be deprived of the credit of TDS of ₹ 74,774/- for the mistake/delay made by the deductor. In the given circumstances, as the assessee was not having any possibility to revise the return u/s 139(5) of the Act, the only option left with him was to file an application u/s 154 of the Act which he did so; and therefore, ld. Assessing Officer using his inherent power u/s 154 of the Act for amending any mistake apparent on record should have examined the claim of the assessee by verifying the books of accounts of the assessee as well as the relevant ledger accounts wherein the impugned amount on which TDS of ₹ 74,774/- has been deducted, is duly reflected. 11. We also observe that none app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
