TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act against intimation order issued under section 143(1) of the Act) of not granting credit of TDS deducted by the deductor amounting to Rs. 1,82,20,456/- solely on the ground that credit of such TDS is not reflecting in Form 26AS. 1.2. On facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not considering the provisions of Section 205 of the Act, per which the assessee should not be called upon to pay the tax on the income to the extent the deductor has already deducted tax from that income. 2. Interest under section 2348 & 234C 2.1. On facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of consequential interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of the appeal. Further, the Appellant craves leave to submit such facts/ documents/ evidence in the course of hearing as may be necessary. 3. The brief facts of the case culled out from the order of Ld. CIT(A) reads as under: 1. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE :....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the limitation of this authority regarding examination and verification of TDS / TCS and advance taxes paid by an assessee. The assessing officers (CPC including) are guided by circulars and instructions issued from time to time by CBDT that TDS credit to the extent of only that matching with 26AS shall be given. It is no fault of the assessing officers if the respective deductors either fail to deduct TDS properly or after deducting fails to deposit it with govt. account properly or even after deducting and depositing fails to upload it in the 26AS system properly. It is more so apparent in the present case itself when CPC carried out two rectifications of the original Intimation u/s 143(1) by giving credit of TDS as updated in 26AS from time to time. The jurisdictional assessing officer is therefore directed to examine and verify 26AS again and allow credit of TDS as eligible to the appellant. This ground of appeal is therefore allowed subject to the above examination and verification. 5.3 As regard the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C, it is again reiterated that charging of such interest are mandatory as per Act. These depend on the amount and dates of payment of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (CBDT) New Delhi, Dated: 11^th March, 2016 Office Memorandum Sub: Non-deposit of tax deducted at source by the deductor- Recovery of demand against the deductee assessee. Vide letter of even number dated 01.06.2015, the Board had issued directions to the field officers that in case of an assessee whose tax has been deducted at source but not deposited to the Government's account by the deductor, the deductee assessee shall not be called upon to pay the demand to the extent tax has been deducted from his income. It was further specified that section 205 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 puts a bar on direct demand against the assessee in such cases and the demand on account of tax credit mismatch in such situations cannot be enforced coercively. 2. However, instances have come to the notice of the Board that these directions are not being strictly followed by the field officers. 3. In view of the above, the Board hereby reiterates the instructions contained in its letter dated 01.06.2015 and directs the assessing officers not to enforce demands created on account of mismatch of credit due to non-payment of TDS amount to the credit of the G....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; 8902198888 _____________________________________________________________________________ Date: 01-11-2013 To The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA), Kolkata, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata 700 069. Sir, Sub .: TDS mismatch- CBDT's Instruction No. 5/2013 Kindly refer to the instruction no 5/2013 dated 08-07-2013 which has been recently issued resulting in a lot of confusion amongst the assessing officers. On perusal of the above instruction it is not clear whether the earlier instructions of the CBDT on the issue of TDS mismatch in respect of A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11 are still valid and has raised question regarding how to issue refund or adjust demands in those cases involving TDS mismatch. As a result of this confusion the work of adjustment of arrear demands and issuing of pending refund has come to a standstill. If this situation is allowed to continue then the following complications may occur. 1. The assessees would suffer for no fault of theirs 2. The d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l other Credit should be given without matching, if 1. Aggregate TDS claim up to Rs. 3,00,000/- 2. Refund up to Rs. 25,000/- 3. At least 10% TDS claim matched In all remaining cases TDS credit shall be given after due verification 09/2010 dtd 09-12-2010 1. For ITR 1 & 2 the limit of Aggregate TDS claim is enhanced up to Rs. 4,00,000/- 2. For NIL matching in ITR 1 & 2 credit is to be given after due verification 3. Due verification may be done in the same manner as was being done in earlier years 2010-11 02/2011 dtd 09-02-2011 ITR 1 to 6 Credit should be given without matching, if 1.TDS claim - Matching is up to Rs. 1.00.000/- 2. For ITR 1 & 2 in case of zero matching TDS credit shall be given up to Rs. 5,000/- 3. In other returns, in case of zero matching TDS credit shall be given after due verification 4. TDS credit not be allowed with invalid TAN In all other cases TDS credit shall be given after due verification 2011-12 01/2012 dtd 02-02-2012 ITR 1 to 6 Withdrawn 04/2012 dtd 25-05-2012 ITR 1 to 6 Credit should be given without matching, if 1.TDS claim - Matchin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the deductor then it does not remain one of the methods - it virtually boils down to the only method. In that case the accepted explanation of due verification no more holds well. This is very confusing as only a couple of years back it was stated that TDS certificate would suffice. So before implementing this verification from deductors we request that there should be clear guide line as what constitutes verification from deductors. Whether a letter of confirmation from the deductor is sufficient as it was in respect of A.Ys. prior to 2008-09 or the AO is required to collect more evidences. if so. then what kind of evidences? 8. Further we fail to understand what fruitful result will be achieved by referring the matters of TDS mismatch to AO (TDS). Whatever data the deductor has uploaded is available to both the Assessing Officer and the AO (TDS). The only thing AO (TDS) can do is to impose fee u/s 234E where no TDS returns have been filed from A.Y. 2012-13. Hence. we are of the view that the assessing officers may be instructed not to refer these cases to AO(TDS) as the exercise would merely leads to wastage of time and stationery. Conclusion In vie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ven instructions that are not only contradictory to each other but in some cases against the instruction of the CBDT. For example in several charges AOs have been directed not to issue refund / reduce demand unless the credit is seen in the 26AS - irrespective of the amount of TDS or refund (i.e. not even in cases falling within the band as discussed in Table A). Unfortunately all these instructions were verbal direction and obeying such direction would land the assessing officers in great trouble. We therefore request you to kindly issue a SOP on this matter at the earliest. 10. Based on the aforesaid submissions, Ld. Sr. DR submitted that since the matter is restored to the file of Ld. AO, the assessee is not remediless and can claim the eligible credits before the Ld. AO. In view of such facts, Ld. CIT(A) have rightly adjudicated the issue, fairly in the interest of justice, the same deserves to be sustained. 11. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and case laws relied upon by the Ld. AR. Admittedly, on perusal of the copy of ITR acknowledgment, computation of income etc. It is apparent that the assessee had claimed a....