9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng entry and wrong credit, the Assessing Officer has to examine the same with open mind and find out whether there was a genuine credit as found in Form 26AS. M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd. is also a tax payer in this country. Therefore, the Revenue cannot shift the burden to the assessee on the ground that M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd. could not be contacted. M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd. is a company registered under the provisions of Companies Act and the Directors can very well be contacted by the Assessing Officer and find out what is the error in TDS return. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that even though the burden of proof is initially on the shoulder of the assessee, the Assessing Officer is also equally responsible to find out w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said sum of ₹ 64,85,397/- for taxation. However, while filing the TDS return, M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd. appears to have claimed a sum of ₹ 1,26,84,856/- paid to the assessee. Out of the so-called claim of M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd., a sum of ₹ 58,36,556/- was said to be given credit on 01.07.2010 is totally incorrect. When the assessee contacted the company M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd., they said they will rectify the TDS return filed electronically. However, they have not rectified. Since the amount was not paid, according to the Ld. counsel, the same cannot be taken as income of the assessee. According to the Ld. counsel, a wrong entry filed by the deductor cannot be a reason to treat the same as income of the assessee. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P. Ltd. was not responded. Therefore, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has not established the claim. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer treated the particulars contained in Form 26AS as genuine and the difference of ₹ 61,99,459/-, as per the credit shown in Form 26AS, was taken as undisclosed receipt by the assessee. The main grievance of the assessee is that the credit entry found on 01.07.2010 to the extent of ₹ 58,36,556/- is a wrong entry. 5. Under the scheme of Income-tax Act, the assessee is expected to pay tax after completion of assessment. In order to ensure the recovery of tax, the Income-tax Act provides payment of tax in advance, before completion of assessment and also provides for deduction of tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re of transaction. If the Assessing Officer could not exercise the power conferred on him, it is not known how the individual citizen of this country will be able to find out the genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, in order to meet the ends of justice, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has to find out the address of M/s Tulip Telecom P. Ltd. and its Directors and thereafter find out whether socalled credit of ₹ 58,36,556/- said to be given on 01.07.2010 is a genuine transaction or it is a wrong entry. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer has to decide the same in accordance with law. Accordingly, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue is remitted back to the file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
