TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1566
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,058/- with respect to difference between the gross turnover as per form 26AS and total receipts offered to tax under various heads in the return. The disallowance Rs. 23,10,058/- of TDS made by the CPC, Bangalore and sustained the same by ADDL/JCIT is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for. 2. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at any time of hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2023-24 on 28.10.2023, declaring total income of Rs. 2,23,12,720/-, claiming refund of Rs. 71,77,330/-. While processing the return of assessee, the same was considered defective by the CPC and notice u/s 139(9) was issued on 13.02.2024, stating that the gross receipts of assessee reflecting in Form 26AS, on which credit for TDS has been claimed, are higher than the total of the receipts shown under all heads of income, in the return of income. Thus, while credit for TDS is being claimed, the corresponding receipts are not offered in the respective income schedules, to arrive at the taxable total income. Hence, the return of income filed is regarded as defective, as provide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ynopsis submitted by the assessee is extracted as under: Sri Jagannath Transport Corporation ITA 162/RPR/2025 A.Y.2023-24 DOH : 06.05.2025 BRIEF FACTS: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld Addl/JCIT (A)-1, Nashik, wherein the Ld Addl/JCIT (A)-1 has sustained the intimation issued u/s 143(1) by the CPC, Bengaluru wherein CPC, Bengaluru has proportionately disallowed the TDS claimed by the assessee amounting to Rs. 23,10,058/- with respect to difference between the gross turnover as per form 26AS and total receipts offered to tax under various heads in the return of Income. GROUND NO.1: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ADDL/JCIT-Appeal has erred in sustaining the order of CPC, Bangalore, where in CPC, Bangalore proportionately disallowed the TDS claimed by the assessee amounting to Rs. 23,10,058/- with respect to difference between the gross turnover as per form 26AS and total receipts offered to tax under various heads in the return. The disallowance of TDS made by the CPC, Bangalore and sustained the same by ADDL/JCIT is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for." SUBMISSION: Observa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... • • That The return was processed by the CPC, and an intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 24.04.2024. The assessee claimed a TDS credit of Rs. 1,49,62,620/- in the return, but only Rs. 1,26,52,567/- was granted. The TDS credit was computed proportionately based on the difference between the gross turnover as per Form 26AS and the total receipts offered for tax under various heads in the return, resulting in a reduction of the refund by Rs. 23,10,053/ -. Kindly refer 6th page of intimation order which was enclosed with Form-36. • The intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC), Bengaluru, is beyond its jurisdiction, as it does not fall under any of the categories of adjustments specified under Section 143(1). Moreover, the issue at hand requires detailed verification, which is not permissible under Section 143(1) and is, in fact, within the scope of Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The said contentions of the assessee finds support from the following judgments :- • EASTER INDUSTRIES LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA, (2012) 81 CCH 0105 DelHC (Kindly refer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P/L Interest Booked In P/L 1233073 Arbitration Award 4716902 IT Refund interest 678206 Other Income 28804 6656985 E=C+D TOTAL INCOME AS PER BOOKS 608125432 Party wise detail reconciliation of above working along with relevant bills are enclosed at page 24-25 (for reconciliation) and 64-104 (for invoices) of APB. • • That the total TDS inadvertently claimed as per above working is Rs. 9,18,161/- (Rs.1,15,952/- +8,02,209/-) . • Considering the above working, a TDS amount of Rs. 13,91,892/- (Rs. 23,10,053 - Rs. 9,18,161) should be allowed. It is prayed accordingly. CA Bikram Jain (Counsel for the Assessee) 6. Based on aforesaid submission, it was the prayer by the counsel of the assessee that, the assessee had rightly claimed the TDS, which is wrongly been understood by the CPC and, the Ld. Addl/ JCIT had interpreted without verifying the facts and reconciliation submitted and explained by the assessee. Under such facts and circumstances, the TDS credit claimed by ....