2022 (8) TMI 679

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... NDING INCOME IS ALSO OFFERED TO TAX. 1.1 On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (herein referred to as 'CITA) has erred in confirming the withdrawal of credit for taxes deducted at source (TDS) under section 1943 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs. 413,750 in respect of professional fees earned by the appellant which is reflecting in Form 26AS and where the corresponding income has also been offered to tax on the ground that the deductor has withdrawn the said credit. 1.2 In doing so, the learned CIT (A) has erred in relying on the statement mentioned in the order u/s. 154 that the taxes deducted earlier in the name of the appellant have been withdrawn by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... from the Ld. CIT (A). Against that order of Ld. CIT (A) passed u/s 250, assessee filed an appeal before us. 5. We have gone through the order passed u/s 154 dated 10-08-2018, order of the Ld. CIT(A) and paper book filed by the assessee in support of her claim. 6. We have examined the submission of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and, statement of total income computed, ledger of retainership fees received, reconciliation of TDS claims along with form no 26AS duly downloaded from the site of CPC and form 16A (processed by CPC) issued by the deductor M/s Tatva Legal. 7. We have noticed page no-10 of paper book (form no 26AS), assessee filed her return of income on 26-09-2013 and this form no 26AS attached by the assessee clearly showing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant has withdrawn certain tax credits as per Rule 37BA. In view of the fact that the taxes deducted earlier in the name of the appellant have been withdrawn by the deductor, only the tax credits which have not been withdrawn and those appearing in the claims of the appellant are allowed by the assessing officer in the case of the appellant. In view of the above facts and circumstances, I do not see any reason to interfere in the order of the AO, the appeals of the appellant are not allowed." This observation challenges even the jurisdiction of CPC Bangalore and jurisdictional ITO ward-35(1)(5). 10. Assessee filed her return of income on the basis of record generated by department itself i.e., form no 26AS and form no 16A. The docume .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X