2017 (5) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....im. 1.2 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, Bengaluru has erred in not allowing credit in respect of TDS deducted and deposited by certain customers wrongly in the erstwhile name of the appellant (IT &T Technology Services Limited now known as IGATE Infrastructure Management Services Limited) of Rs. 61,84,211/-. 1.3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, Bengaluru has erred III concluding that; (i) IT &T Technology Services Limited (IT &T) and the appellant are two different entities as it has a different PAN (ii) the payers who have deducted tax in the old name of the appellant has not furnished a statement indicating the new name of the appellant 1.4 The learned....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the basis of TDS certificates which were at all times available with the appellant and furnished before the lower authorities. Prayer 8.1 In view of the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing, the appellant prays that the order passed by the lower authorities be quashed Or in the alternative (i) Credit towards TDS deducted in the erstwhile name of the appellant to be allowed. (ii) Credit of TDS to be allowed on the basis of the basis of TDS certificates and not on the basis of form 26AS. The appellant prays accordingly." 2. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the fact that AO has not allowed the TDS cred....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... found that TDS was deducted and credited by the deductor in the Government account, then the credit of the same should have been given to the assessee. 5. The ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of CIT(Appeals) with the submission that deductor can make necessary rectification with the authorities concerned with regard to error in the name of the deductee and its PAN No. 6. Having carefully examined the order of lower authorities in the light of rival submissions, we find that undisputedly there is a mistake committed by the deductor while deducting and depositing the TDS, but it does not mean that deductee should suffer for the act of deductor. When there is mismatch in the TDS accounts, the AO should make necessary verification a....