TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 850
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 23/9/2020 passed by The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre Bangalore (the learned AO) was partly allowed. 02. The assessee is aggrieved with the same and has preferred this appeal raising almost 9 grounds of appeal as under: - "This appeal is against the order passed us. 250 by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NEAC), Delhi and relates to Assessment Year 2019-20, 1) The Appellant objects to the tax demand of Rs.2,23,46,830/- in an order passed under section 154 of the Act. 2) CPC Bangalore/Assessing Officer erred in passing an order under section 154 of the Act, withdrawing credit for tax deducted at source of Rs.2,09,15,619/-, without issue of a notice under sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of interest. The Appellant denies its liability to be levied any interest under section 234B & 234C of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, modify or withdraw any or all the Grounds of Appeal before or at the time of hearing of the Appeal, as they may be advised from time to time." 03. The brief fact of the case shows that assessee is a limited liability partnership , assessed as a firm , filed its return of income for assessment year 2019 - 20 on 30/10/2019 at a total income of Rs. 68,818,720/-. In the return of income assessee claimed a tax credit of tax deduction at source of Rs. 43,630,555/-. When the central processing Centre Bangalore passed an intimation under section 143 (1) of the act on June 3, 2020 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar in which taxes deducted by the payer and the year in which credit thereof is claimed by the assessee are different. This is so because the claim of year in which deduction available to the payer is different and the assessment year in which the income of assessee is taxable is also different. Therefore the tax deduction at source credit claimed and TDS reflected in form number 26AS differs. Accordingly in the return of income assessee has claimed tax credit of Rs 43,630,555/-. In the return of income filed by the assessee, assessee provided all details of tax which was deducted in previous year and for which credit is claimed in the year under consideration and tax which is deducted during the year but for which credit has not been claim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellant failed to produce the TDS and TAN details for verification of TDS till the hearing date fixed for 18/8/2022. Therefore, the appeal is being disposed of considering the materials available on record. In view of the above, the disallowance made by the AO of Rs. 22,598,479/- is confirmed. The appeal on this ground is dismissed." 07. Therefore, assessee is aggrieved and preferred this appeal. The grievance of the assessee is manifold. It was submitted that when there is a rectification under section 154 of the act and if it decreases the refund to the assessee, a specific notice is required to be given to the assessee giving reasonable opportunity of being heard. This was not given. Further the assessee submitted a detailed paper ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refund of the assessee , proper notice should be given to the assessee and he must be allowed a reasonable opportunity of being heard. In the present case when the tax credit already granted to the assessee is withdrawn, no such notice was issued to the assessee. Therefore the withdrawal of tax credit already granted to the assessee is not in accordance with the law. 010. In the present case the only dispute was unmatched tax deduction at source entries aggregating to Rs. 1,682,860. Therefore, in the interest of justice we direct the learned assessing officer to grant tax credit to the assessee as per claim of the assessee in the return of income. If the AO wants to verify on sample basis with respect to the tax deduction at source amounti....