TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 1726
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on 30.10.2007 at the total income of Rs. 1,70,60,011/- and claimed TDS credit for Rs. 94,00,697/- only. Subsequently on 27.7.2009 the assessee filed an application u/s 154 requesting for additional TDS credit of Rs. 20,04,748/- and claimed refund of the above amount with interest. The details of TDS credit claimed in the 154 application are as under :- S. No. Particulars Amount 1. Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. 427013/- 2. Bhushan Steel & Strips Ltd. 93640/- 3. Indo Rama Petrochemicals 482460/- 4. Indo Rama Petrochemicals 92565/- 5. MPPGCL 31641/- 6. MPPGCL 31641/- 7. MPPGCL 31066/- 8. Keshav Power (P) Ltd. 814722/- Total 20,04,748/- 4. The AO vide his order dated 11.5.2011 had rejected the assessee's claim for further refund of Rs. 20,04,748/-. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority who has given relief. 5. In the assessment year 2008-09 the assessee had e-filed its return of income on 3.10.2008 at the total income of Rs. 6,82,75,050/- and claimed TDS credit for Rs. 3,69,85,737/- only. Subsequently the assessee filed a revised return on 18.9.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gone through the orders of the authorities below we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee in view of the provisions laid down u/s 155(14) of the Act, which is being reproduced hereunder :- "(14) Where in the assessment for any previous year or in any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section(1) of section 143 for any previous year, credit for tax deducted in accordance with the provisions of section 199 has not been given on the ground that the certificate furnished under section 203 was not filed with the return and subsequently such certificate is produced before the Assessing Officer within two years from the end of the assessment year in which such income is assessable, the Assessing Officer shall amend the order of assessment or any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143, as the case may be, and the provisions of section 154 shall, so far as may be, apply thereto. Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply unless the income from which the tax has been deducted has been disclosed in the return of income filed by the assessee for the relevant assessment year." 10. In the applicati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he stand of the Ld. CIT(A). In the case of Gloric Investment Ltd. vs. DDIT (supra) assessee had filed original return for assessment year 2002-03 on 26.12.2002 declaring nil income claiming benefit of DTAA and also claiming refund of TDS amounting to Rs. 4 lacs odd-refund granted by the Department vide intimation u/s 143(1). Later on assessee discovered that there was yet another TDS certificate relating to same assessment year in the sum of Rs. 2 lac odd. The assessee claimed refund in respect of the said amount by way of rectification application u/s 154 on 31.3.2004 enclosing original TDS certificate. Yet another application for refund was made u/s 155(14) on 17.1.2005. In the meanwhile notice u/s 148 was issued. In response to which assessee declared same income but claiming additional refund of Rs. 2 lacs odd. Income of the assessee again assessed at nil in reassessment proceedings without granting refund of Rs. 2 lacs odd. Ld. CIT(A) rejected the assessee's appeal against non-grant of refund. The Tribunal held the action of the Ld. CIT(A) as not justified. It was held that placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income Tax.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. The certificate was found to be correct. The income comprised in such certificate had already suffered taxation. Thus there was no reason to hold that the assessee was not entitled to credit for such tax. It was hled that there was no prejudice to the revenue if the credit of such tax deducted was given. Credit was given only in respect of sums which was already deducted from the income of the assessee and which had been paid to the credit of the Government. The Tribunal accordingly held that there was neither any error in the order of section 154 nor any prejudice caused to the Government by giving credit. Thus it was held that there was no error in the order u/s 154 sought to be revised by the Commissioner. This decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court dismissing the appeal of the revenue on the basis that as the provisions of section 155(14) were not in the statute book on the day of AO passed the order u/s 154, the order passed on 12.6.2001 could not be strictly in accordance with the law. It was erroneous. The amendment came into effect only from 1.6.2002. But on the day the Commissioner exercised this power and passed the order on 31.7.2002, the a....