TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Directs AO to Reassess TDS Credit Denial Due to Deductor's Error, Citing Appellant's Genuine Hardship.</h1> <h3>Suja International Versus DCIT, Circle 54 (1), New Delhi</h3> Suja International Versus DCIT, Circle 54 (1), New Delhi - TMI Issues involved: Non-allowance of credit of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the relevant assessment year.Summary:Issue 1: Non-allowance of TDS creditThe appeal was against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the non-allowance of TDS credit of Rs. 9,54,132/- in the relevant assessment year, despite the corresponding income being assessed. The Assessing Officer (AO) did not allow the TDS credit as it was not reflected in the assessee's 26AS statement. The appellant filed a rectification application which was rejected by the AO. The appellant argued that the deductor had wrongly shown the TDS amount in a different assessment year, leading to non-reflection in 26AS. The appellant requested the deductor to revise the TDS statement, but no action was taken.Issue 2: ArgumentsThe appellant's representative argued that the TDS amount was not reflected in 26AS due to the deductor's error in submission. Supporting documents were provided to show the credit/reflection of the TDS amount in the bank account ledger. The appellant faced genuine hardship in not receiving the TDS credit, as it could not file a return for the year when the TDS was deducted since the business was not operational then.Issue 3: DecisionAfter hearing both parties, the Tribunal acknowledged the genuine hardship faced by the appellant in not receiving the TDS credit. While technically the AO was justified in not allowing the credit due to non-reflection in 26AS, a solution had to be found. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify the facts and, if necessary, use Section 119 of the Act to address the appellant's grievance and allow the TDS credit for the relevant assessment year. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.This summary provides a detailed overview of the issues involved in the legal judgment, the arguments presented by both parties, and the decision rendered by the Tribunal.
TaxTMI 