9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1092X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ditya Coke Pvt. Ltd. had remitted TDS of ₹ 12,41,617/- on 24/03/2013. The Hon ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Bhooratnam Co.. [ 2013 (1) TMI 478 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that the revenue cannot be allowed to retain tax deducted at source without credit being available to anybody, if credit is not allowed to the assessee, and the joint venture has not filed return of income, then credit of the TDS cannot be taken by anybody. This is not the spirit and intention of law. Therefore, in our view, the Assessing Officer erred in denying the benefit of the TDS mentioned in the TDS certificates filed by the assessee on the ground that the TDS certificate is issued in the name of the joint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred on facts as also in law in confirming action AO in rejecting the appellant's application for rectification of mistake field u/s. 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on the alleged ground that the appellant has neither claimed any credit in TDS of ₹ 12,40,875/-in return of income nor filed revised return income by claiming credit of TDS. The rejection of rectification application is totally unjustified and against the law and therefore the mistake apparent from record may kindly be directed to be rectified. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is engaged in the business of trading of Cement, Coal, Sand and other allied items. Originally return of income was filed u/s. 139(1) of the Act on 24/09/2012 declaring total in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the remarks that there is no mistake apparent from record as the appellant has neither claimed arty credit of TDS in return of income nor filed any revised returned income by claiming credit of TDS. 6. The appellant had carried out Factory Operations and management of M/s Aditya Coke Pvt. Ltd. The appellant as per the terms of agreements between the parties from time to time charged professional services fees of ₹ 1,24,18,170/- and credited to the profit and loss account. Since the amount charged the limit of-turnover within the meaning of section 44AB of the Act, the books of were audited and the same are filed with the department. 7. That in view of the provisions of section 194J, M/s Aditya Coke Pvt. was required to deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pported by the corresponding referable income credited in the profit and loss account Since the deductor had not remitted the IDS in Government account before the due of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act, the appellant did not claim it in the return of income. Even if it was claimed in the return of income it was not for the credit of the in the absence of evidence in the form of form 26AS supporting the credit of the TDS in Government account. However, as soon as they came to know that the deductor has remitted the IDS on 24.03.2013. The appellant moved an application u/s. 154 and same was rejected by both the lower authorities on the ground that appellant is not entitled as it has not claimed at the time of filing of original return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present case, the appellant furnished the TDS certificate and at the time of filing of original return could not file because M/s Aditya Coke Pvt. Ltd. remitted the TDS in the Government account on 24/03/2013. Therefore same was not reflecting at the time of filing of return. 14. In view of the above, we set aside this matter back to the tile of the Assessing Officer examine the Form 26AS and other details have been submitted by the appellant before the lower authorities and if it is found that M/s Aditya Coke Pvt. Ltd. has remitted the TDS of ₹ 12,41,617/- in the Government account then will give benefit of the same to the assessee. 15. In the result, appeal filed by Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 24- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
