TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome was at Rs. 33,95,889/- [Rs. 16,97,787 from house property + Rs. 16,98,102/- profit & gain from business & profession]. Gross Tax liability was Rs. 10,59,518/- which was paid. However a fresh demand of Rs. 4,27,238/- was made. On page 44 of appeal memo an amount of Rs. 9,67,280/- was claimed as TDS, the amount Rs. 6,02,418/-was found matched & Rs. 3,64,862/- was found to be mismatched [ Details of unmatched tax deducted at source] hence the demand of Rs. 4,27,238/- u/s. 143(1). That the aforesaid intimation order u/s. 143(1) bears No.:-CPC/1920/AS/1961789557 with demand identification no. 201920 1937107129042T and that the same is dated 17.02.2020 which is herein after referred to as the "Impugned intimation Order". 2.2 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid "Impugned assessment Order" prefers the first appeal u/s. 246A of the act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the "Impugned Order" has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the grounds & reasons stated therein. The core grounds & reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal were as under:- "6. Observations, Findings and Decisions I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in which the income is assessable. The provisions of section 205 of the Act lay down that once tax has been deducted at source, there would be no direct demand from the assessee from whose income tax has been deducted. Thus, the provisions of section 205 are in the context of recovery of demand and have nothing to do with the credit of TDS. For the purpose of claiming credit of TDS, the method of accounting followed by the assessee is also of no relevance. It is now well settled that the credit of TDS can be claimed in a year in which the income is assessable. Or in a later year if the income from which tax has been deducted has already been assessed in an earlier year. 7.5 In this regard, the provisions of Section 199 of the Act and Rule 37BA of the IT Rules governing the credit of Tax deducted at source are to be examined. Credit for tax deducted. 199. (1) Any deduction made in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Chapter and paid to the Central Government shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made, or of the owner of the security, or of the depositor or of the owner of property or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(2) or sub-rule (3), for the purposes of section 194N, credit for tax deducted at source shall be given to the person from whose account tax is deducted and paid to the Central Government account for the assessment year relevant to the previous-year in which such tax deduction is made.] (4) Credit for tax deducted at source and paid to the account of the Central Government shall be granted on the basis of- (1) the information relating to deduction of tax furnished by the deductor to the income-tax authority or the person authorised by such authority, and (1) the information in the return of income in respect of the claim for the credit, subject to verification in accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time.] In view of the above, it is inferred that the information regarding the deduction of tax and deposit of such tax deducted by the deductor has to be given to the Central Government and in a certificate to be issued to the deductee. This can be evidenced by TDS certificate and Form 26AS. A perusal of the Form 26AS of the appellant shows that Rs. 6,93,587/- was deducted against a payment of Rs. 33,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of shri Abhishek Kumar Baheti partner of GT sales dated 23.04.2026 is placed on the records of this Tribunal in support of the condonation of delay. It is stated therein that the "Impugned Order" dated 31.12.2024 was passed in electronic mode & was not served manually or physically. The mail might have gone in to spam/junk folder and therefore firm remained unaware of the same. That in the month of June 2025 upon logging in to the income tax e-filing portal it came to the notice that the "Impugned Order" was passed & immediately thereafter the instant appeal was filed albeit with a delay of 130 days. On 10.07.2025 the appeal was filed. It is avered in the aforesaid affidavit dated 23.04.2026 that the delay in filling the appeal was neither deliberate nor intentional, but occurred solely due to the lack of knowledge of passing of the "Impugned Order". There was no negligence or malafide intent. In the interest of ends of justice appeal be admitted after condoning the delay. Per contra the Ld. DR appearing for & on the behalf of the revenue contended that department of income tax has no objection if the delay is condoned. Accordingly we condone the delay in filling the present appea....