9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 965X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the same time, since the assessee has consistently pleaded both before the CPC and also the CIT(A) that the gross receipts on which TDS was deducted during the impugned assessment year amounting to Rs. 5,24,60,000/- included receipts which had already been returned to tax in the preceding two assessment years; i.e. AYs 2021-22 2022-23 as tabulated above, the AO is directed to give necessary credit of TDS to the income returned to tax in those years. In terms of the aforesaid directions given by us, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Sakar Sharma, AR For the Revenue : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld.CIT(A)] dated 09.08.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act for short) pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2023-2024. 2. The short issue arising in the present appeal for our adjudication relates to denial of credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n nature requires no adjudication and is therefore Dismissed. 6.2. Ground of appeal no. 1 challenges the action of the AO in restricting the TDS credit to Rs. 407,968/- as against the claim of Rs. 524,600/-. The appellant has made the following arguments: i. The AO, CPC erred in declared the appellant's return as defective. ii. The credit for TDS is restricted by invoking the provisions of Rule 37BA despite there being no mismatch of TDS. ii. The appellant has already declared the income corresponding to the TDS reflected in 26AS in A.Y.s 2021-22, 2022-23 2023-24. Hence the credit is to be allowed. 6.2.1. I have very carefully considered the grounds of appeal, facts of the case and appellant's submissions supra and I am unable to agree with the same due to the following: i. It is an admitted fact that before processing the revised return, the AO, CPC issued a prior communication to the appellant dated 12/12/2023 regarding the mismatch in the gross receipts reflected in the 26AS and that declared by the appellant in its ITR. The appellant filed reply electronically on 22/12/2023 that the gross receipts totaling Rs. 524,60,000/- corresponding to the TDS of Rs. 524,600/- refle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, credit for the whole or any part of the tax deducted at source, as the case may be, shall be given to the other person and not to the deductee: Provided that the deductee files a declaration with the deductor and the deductor reports the tax deduction in the name of the other person in the information relating to deduction of tax referred to in sub-rule (1).) (ii) The declaration filed by the deductee under clause (i) shall contain the name, address, permanent account number of the person to whom credit is to be given, payment or credit in relation to which credit is to be given and reasons for giving credit to such person. (iii) The deductor shall issue the certificate for deduction of tax at source in the name of the person in whose name credit is shown in the information relating to deduction of tax referred to in sub-rule (1) and shall keep the declaration in his safe custody. (3) (i) Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the Central Government, shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable. (ii) Where tax has been deducted at source and paid to the Central Government and the income is assessable over a number of years, credit for tax de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement by the deductor as mandated u/s 199 and Rule 37BA(1). If there is any mismatch in the TDS claimed as per the return vis a vis the TDS statement filed by the deductor, the same can be rectified by getting appropriate correction statement filed by the deductor. Appellant is at liberty of seek appropriate remedy thereafter. Thus contentions (ii) (iii) of the appellant fail. 6.2.6. In view of the above facts and discussions, on the issue of granting of credit for TDS, there is no infirmity in the action of the AO, CPC and therefore no interference is warranted. The TDS u/s 1941A of the Act to the tune of Rs. 407,968/- has been rightly granted by the AO, CPC. This ground of appeal is Dismissed . 4.2. As is evident from the above, the Ld.CIT(A) has interpreted the provisions of Section 199 of the Act, 1961 read with Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and noted that TDS credit, as per law, is to be allowed only to that portion of the TDS deducted on income which is returned to tax in the impugned assessment year and noting the said interpretation of law and taking into consideration the fact, which was pointed out by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee before us also, that the TDS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
