TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1211
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2021-22. 2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are as under: Ground No. 1 : Grant of short credit of TDS to the extent of Rs. 22,63,023/- "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in granting short credit of Tax Deducted at Source ("TDS") to the Appellant i.e., TDS claimed in return of income (ITR) at Rs. 29,98,646/- whereas the credit of TDS granted in the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is Rs. 7,35,623/- resulting in short grant of TDS to the extent of Rs. 22,63,023. The Appellant prays that the Ld. AO to be directed to grant full credit of TDS as claimed by the Appellant in its ITR and as also reflected in the Form 26 AS." 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hod in AY 2020-21. Further, corresponding credit of TDS was claimed in A.Y. 2020-21 amounting to Rs. 79,75,240/- and the balance of Rs. 17,50,660/- (97,25,900-79,75,240) was carried forward to be claimed in the subsequent assessment year i.e. AY 2021-22. Subsequently, due to technical issues, HPCL decided not to pursue the project and therefore, the same was cancelled as per mutual decision between the assessee and the HPCL. However, the HPCL agreed to pay the assessee for the work already undertaken. It was mutually discussed and decided that the assessee would be paid for the work amounting to Rs. 8,31,99,040/- on which TDS was also deducted. Since, the assessee had already offered income to the extent of Rs. 3,41,57,493/- in AY 2020-21, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtion of Rule 37BA as above. Hence, this part of the Ground of Appeal is DISMISSED." 6. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. Admittedly, TDS of Rs. 97,25,900/-was deducted from the advance given to the assessee by HPCL in the earlier AY. Out of this amount, credit of Rs. 79,75,240/- has already been claimed during AY 2020-21. As the contract stands terminated and the money has been refunded back, the assessee has no other option but to claim the balance TDS of Rs. 17,50,660/- during the year under consideration. The Ld. AR has vehemently argued that HPCL has duly deducted and deposited the tax in the Government's account. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 29,28,59,937/- as mobilization advance which is not an income. But by virtue of Section 194C, TDS of Rs. 59,12,958/- was deducted and credited to the account of the assessee in part. For the assessment year 2002-2003, the assessee has suffered loss. Consequently, there was no income. In the returns filed, the assessee sought for refund of the entire amount. The Assessing Authority treated the receipt of Rs. 7,32,14,128/- as income and granted a refund of Rs. 14,93,568/- out of the TDS amount. He declined to pay the balance amount on the ground that it is adjustable in the future years as and when the assessee offers to tax. If the amount of Rs. 29,98,50,937/- is a mobilisation advance and not an income at all, the question of paying in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch tax was deducted at source is not at all chargeable to tax, then the command of section 199 will have to harmoniously and pragmatically read as providing for allowing credit for the tax deducted at source in the year of the receipt of the amount, on which tax was deducted at source. If the view point canvassed by the Revenue is accepted and the assessee is not allowed credit for the tax deducted at source will remain in limbo. The Revenue will never be in position to allow credit for such tax because the amount is not chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee and it cannot retain such amount with it in contravention of Article 265 of the Constitution of India. To circumvent such a situation, the only possible solution is to allow cr....