9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act any addition was made and only the credit for TDS and advance tax was being made, therefore, the same ought to have been allowed in the hands of the person in whose case the income of the earlier entity was finally assessed. Hence, the grounds of appeal in respect of credit for TDS and Advance Tax are allowed pertaining to the amalgamating company while assessing/computing the income u/s 143(3) read with Section 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act in the case of the amalgamated company. Hence, Ground nos. 1, 7, 8 9 are allowed. Validity of order u/s 143(3) being infructuous as the cause of action had arisen in the intimation u/s 143(1) - As a finding has been given that the credit of taxes paid has to be allowed in the case of the amalgamated company, hence these grounds of appeal are also allowed and since no variation to the income computation was made in the order u/s 143(3) and the demand arisen on account of intimation u/s 143(1) had been subsumed in the demand raised vide order u/s 143(3), the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal relating to the claim of credit for taxes paid. Hence, all these grounds of appeal are also allowed. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal against the intimation order passed under section 143(1) of the Act since scrutiny assessment had been initiated and hence any appeal filed against the intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act would have become infructuous. 6. For that on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant by holding that the appeal filed against the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act is infructuous. 7. For that on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not directing the Ld. AO in granting the TDS credit claimed as per the Return of Income even after admitting that there is no dispute that amalgamated entity is eligible for the pre-paid tax credit of the amalgamating entity. 8. For that on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not granting TDS credit and Advance Tax of Rs. 1,23,331 and Rs. 1,75,000 respectively, which was claimed by the appellant in the return on the ground that the said TDS credit and Advance Tax is duly appearing in Form 26AS of the amalgamating company (GMB Investments Private Limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 2018-19 on 30.09.2018 showing total income of Rs. 16,92,420/-. In the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee contested that the Ld. AO erred on the facts and in law in not allowing credit of TDS and Advance Tax for Rs. 1,23,331/- and Rs. 1,75,000/- respectively in the assessment order dated 12.02.2021 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. In ground no. (1)(b) it was claimed that above TDS credit and Advance Tax credit was duly appearing in Form 26AS of GMB Investments Pvt. Ltd., being the amalgamating company, which got amalgamated with the appellant during the FY 2017-18 pursuant to the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Kolkata Bench vide order dated 19.3.2018 in CP(CAA) NO.736/KB/2017 and that the said TDS credit and Advance Tax have neither been claimed by nor refunded to the amalgamating company, GMB Investments Pvt. Ltd. In ground no. (1)(c), it was raised that the income corresponding to the above TDS credit and Advance Tax claimed has been credited in the Accounts of the appellant for the year under consideration and considered for taxation in the return filed by the appellant. The consequent ground of short allowance of interest u/s 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. AR submitted that the rectification applications dated 20.05.2022 and 15.01.2024 filed u/s 154 of the Act against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act are pending. An application dated 25.07.2019 u/s 154 of the Act was also filed before the CPC against the intimation order against u/s 143(1) of the Act which was rejected vide order u/s 154 of the Act dated 27.09.2019. 3.2. We have gone through the submissions made. The assessee contends that the income in respect of which TDS was deducted and advance tax was paid has been shown in the return of AY 2018-19 in the case of the amalgamated company under the provisions of sub-Section (1) to Section 199 of the Act. Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of the Chapter relating to TDS and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property or of the unit-holder, or of the shareholder, as the case may be. As per Section 198 of the Act, the tax deducted is income received for the purpose of computing the income of an assessee. Since the income on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
