Tribunal directs AO to verify TCS credit claim, appeal allowed for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal directed the AO to verify if any other individual claimed the TCS credit; if not, the assessee's claim should be allowed. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes to prevent unjust withholding of tax deposited by a wrong person. The order was pronounced on June 16, 2017.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).
2. Denial of credit for TDS and TCS amounts.
3. Duty of the assessee to rectify the mismatch of TDS.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Order Passed by Ld. CIT(A):
The appellant contended that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is void-ab-initio. However, this issue was not pressed during the hearing, and thus, no further analysis was provided on this ground.

2. Denial of Credit for TDS and TCS Amounts:
The primary contention was regarding the denial of credit for TDS amounting to Rs. 53,877 and TCS amounting to Rs. 6,99,667. The assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A) and AO rejected the claim on technical grounds, which should not obstruct substantive justice. The assessee relied on the decision in Maruti Civil Works vs. ITO, asserting that the TCS was collected and deposited by the State Government, and thus, the credit should be granted to the assessee. The Ld. Departmental Representative opposed this, stating that the claim was contrary to legal provisions.

The Tribunal referred to a similar case decided by the S.M.C., which supported the assessee’s claim for TCS credit. It was noted that the State Government had collected TCS and issued the certificate in the assessee's name. The Tribunal found merit in the argument that denying credit would result in unjust enrichment for the government. However, the Ld. CIT(A) had held that TCS credit should be claimed by the lessee of the mine, not the toll contractor (the appellant), as per Section 206C(1C).

The Tribunal concluded that the assessee, being neither a licensee nor a lessee, did not fall under the category specified in Section 206C(1C). However, considering that the TCS was deposited at the instance of the mining department and the certificate was issued in the assessee’s name, the Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to verify if any other individual claimed the TCS credit. If not, the assessee’s claim should be allowed to ensure substantive justice, preventing the revenue from withholding tax deposited by a wrong person.

3. Duty of the Assessee to Rectify the Mismatch of TDS:
This ground was not pressed by the assessee during the hearing and thus was not analyzed further.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal directed the AO to verify whether any other individual claimed the TCS credit. If no other claim exists, the assessee’s claim should be allowed. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, ensuring that the revenue does not unjustly withhold tax deposited by a wrong person. The order was pronounced on June 16, 2017.

---