TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>TDS credit where third-party deductor failed to deposit intimation disallowed and refund with interest directed to assessees.</h1> Non-grant of credit for tax deducted at source by a third-party deductor where the deductor failed to deposit the TDS was addressed: the intimation ... Non-grant of credit of Tax Deducted at Source by the Kingfisher Airlines -- liability where deductor fails to deposit TDS - refund of amounts recovered and interest u/s 244(1) and Section 244(1A) - maintainability of writ petition in High Court on territorial grounds - Appeal maintainability on the ground of territorial jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- When the assessee had filed return for the Assessment Year (2012-13), admittedly, the petitioner's assessing authority was at Delhi.That apart the day when the petition came to be filed, the Assessing Authority of the petitioner was at Delhi. Merely because subsequently, it has changed to Bangalore, he cannot be non-suited on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. Credit for Tax Deducted at Source by a third-party deductor - intimation under Section 143(1) disallowing TDS credit and consequent recovery from the assessee - We are of the view that the respondent could perhaps been justified in disallowing the amount of TDS which was collected by Kingfisher Airlines from the petitioner's salary, as the same was not deposited by said deductor but the petitioner cannot be blamed for that and deprived of his legitimate right, as has been held by this Court in its judgment Satwant Singh Sanghera [2024 (10) TMI 762 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Writ petition allowed and quash and set aside the intimation dated 07.06.2013 to the extent it relates to the non-grant of credit of Tax Deducted at Source by the Kingfisher Airlines. The consequential demand notice and the recovery made from petitioner’s refund is also declared illegal. The respondent is directed to refund the amount recovered from the petitioner along with applicable interest under Section 244(1) and 244(1) (A) of the Act of 1961, within a period of three months from today. It shall be required of the respondent to ensure that the applicable amount is paid to the petitioner. Issues: (i) Whether the Delhi High Court had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition filed by the assessee; (ii) Whether the assessee is entitled to credit for Tax Deducted at Source by a third-party deductor (Kingfisher Airlines) and to refund of amounts recovered from the assessee on account of non-grant of such credit, with interest.Issue (i): Whether the writ petition could be maintainable in Delhi despite subsequent change of assessing authority.Analysis: The petition was filed when the assessee's assessing authority and residence were in Delhi; subsequent change of assessing authority to another city does not defeat territorial jurisdiction existing at the time of filing.Conclusion: The territorial jurisdiction objection is rejected and the writ petition is maintainable in Delhi.Issue (ii): Whether the assessee is entitled to TDS credit for amounts deducted by Kingfisher Airlines and to a refund of amounts recovered from the assessee on account of non-grant of that credit, together with statutory interest.Analysis: The disallowance of TDS credit on the ground that the deductor failed to deposit the tax does not render the assessee liable to lose the credit; recovery effected from the assessee's refund in respect of the disputed TDS was consequent on the intimation under Section 143(1) and is contrary to the entitlement established by the applicable legal position relied upon by the Court.Conclusion: The intimation under Section 143(1) insofar as it denies credit for the TDS deducted by the third-party is quashed; the consequential demand and recovery from the assessee's refund are declared illegal and the respondent is directed to refund the recovered amount with applicable interest under Sections 244(1) and 244(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 within three months.Final Conclusion: The writ petition is allowed on the merits and on jurisdictional grounds; the relief is confined to amounts deducted by the third-party deductor and does not affect any other independent demands raised by the Assessing Officer.Ratio Decidendi: An assessee remains entitled to TDS credit for tax deducted by a third-party deductor notwithstanding the deductor's failure to deposit the tax, and recoveries made from the assessee's refund on that basis are unlawful; territorial jurisdiction is determined by the position at the time of filing the petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
