https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311965 ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee was entitled to TDS credit on mobilization advance despite revenue authorities' rejection. The tribunal found that if authorities maintained the assessee had not commenced business and revenue recognition was rejected, then TDS deduction by the payer was incorrect. Following precedent in Patel Engineering case, mobilization advance was not considered income and TDS credit should be allowed in the year of deduction. The tribunal rejected the revenue's mechanical approach requiring separate applications for wrong TDS deduction, citing SC decisions in Shelly Products and Suzuki Parasrampuria cases. The AO was directed to grant TDS credit. en-us Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jan 2024 19:04:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311965 ITAT Mumbai held that the assessee was entitled to TDS credit on mobilization advance despite revenue authorities' rejection. The tribunal found that if authorities maintained the assessee had not commenced business and revenue recognition was rejected, then TDS deduction by the payer was incorrect. Following precedent in Patel Engineering case, mobilization advance was not considered income and TDS credit should be allowed in the year of deduction. The tribunal rejected the revenue's mechanical approach requiring separate applications for wrong TDS deduction, citing SC decisions in Shelly Products and Suzuki Parasrampuria cases. The AO was directed to grant TDS credit. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311965