9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 664X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (4), Udaipur. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. ITO/AO has erred in law as well as in facts by disallowed TDS of Rs. 36400 on account of mismatch & later on TDS matched but AO not given credit." 3. At the outset of hearing the bench noted that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 309 days and the assessee has prayed that he being senior citizen and on account of physical movement restriction imposed on account of Covid-19 he was advised not to come in the contact of the anyone and therefore, there exist a delay of 309 days. The assessee appeared personally explained the reasons attributable to delay. The bench noted that the order against which th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the IT Act as it has been filed beyond the time permitted by the Act. Reliance is placed on the case of Ashu Engiment Plastics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT in ITA No. 3453/Mum/2010 (AY 2001-02) dated 29.04.2011." 6. Feeling dissatisfied from the finding so recorded by the ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred the present appeal on the grounds as stated in para 2 above. To support the grounds so raised by the the assessee, he himself appeared and reiterated the facts stated in the written submissions and the same is reproduced herein below. "With reference to the above I have attended hearing fixed on 16.10.2023 at Hearing Bench SMC Jodhpur and as per verbal discussion with the bench they suggest me send by post brief detail of the case and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he application on the ground that rectification is more than 4 years old and its not allowable. (Copy of Correspondence made to ITO Udaipur and Bhilwara regarding correction of TDS mismatch and after that matched TDS in TRACES are enclosed)" 6. I would like to state here that IT Department inform me regarding demand of A.Y. 2008-09 in the year 2017 when Refund of A.Y. 2017-18 adjusted against the said demand i.e. After 9 years. 7. After rejection of Rectification request U/S 154 I have filled an Appeal to CIT (A) Appeal Udaipur but same has also been dismissed by CIT (Appeals) National faceless Appeal Centre on dt. 25.03.2021. At that time all my family members were suffering from COVID 19 and its take a year to recover from the COVID a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk Bhilwara and Udaipur Branch on salary income for Rs. 36,400/-and accordingly claim of Refund of Rs. 1700/-(36400-34700). Subsequently, the assessee came to know that his Refund of A.Y. 2017-18 adjusted against the demand raised on 31.03.2010 for the A.Y. 2008-09. On being aware of the fact the assessee made communication from the department regarding demand of A.Y. 2008-09 then the officer make aware the assessee that there exist a demand vide intimation order dt. 31.03.2010 wherein the demand of Rs. 44103/-(tax 34700+Int 9403) is raised due to mismatch of TDS claimed. Immediately, the assessee started taking the corrective steps and he contacted the Dena Bank Bhilwara and Udaipur Branch as well as ITO Udaipur and Bhilwara to rectify the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
