TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1316
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' in short) for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- "1. The Learned NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI has erred in confirming disallowance for credit of TDS of Rs. 3,50,000/- without considering our submissions and explanations. 2. The Learned NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI has erred in not considering the fact that we had already settled the accounts of Goyal Developers and Goyal Developers has not claimed the TDS of Rs. 3,50,000/-." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30.09.2015 declaring total income of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owance of TDS credit, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had duly deducted and deposited TDS of Rs. 3,50,000/- u/s 194IA of the Act; however, while filing Form No.26QB, the assessee inadvertently quoted its own PAN instead of the PAN of the seller, i.e. M/s Goyal Developers, due to which the TDS credit was reflected in the assessee's Form No.26AS. It was submitted that the error was purely clerical and bona fide, the seller has not claimed the impugned TDS credit and the entire transaction stood fully settled between the parties. The Ld. AR, therefore, contended that the issue is procedural in nature and requires correction of the departmental records. Reliance was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and that the seller ought to have sought correction of the TDS particulars. The Ld. CIT(A) has affirmed the said action. 8.2 From the material available before us, we find that there is no dispute regarding the actual deduction and deposit of tax with the Central Government. There is also no finding recorded by the Revenue authorities that the tax has not been deposited or that any double credit has been claimed. The controversy is confined only to an inadvertent mistake committed while quoting the PAN in Form No.26QB. Before us, the assessee has contended that the mistake was bona fide and clerical in nature, that the seller has not claimed the impugned TDS credit. 8.3 The entire legal sequence of issue and the remedy accorded is as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ler's PAN column, TDS credit of Rs. 3,50,000/- was reflected in the assessee's Form 26AS instead of M/s Goyal Developers' Form 26AS. The assessee, acting in complete good faith and in lawful reliance upon its own Government-authenticated Form 26AS, claimed TDS credit of Rs. 3,50,000/- in its Return of Income for AY 2015-16. * NO DOUBLE CREDIT: M/s Goyal Developers did not and could not claim TDS credit of Rs. 3,50,000/-, as no such credit appeared in their Form 26AS. There is, therefore, no instance of double credit or double benefit having been availed by any party. 8.4 In view of above, in our considered opinion, the present issue is essentially procedural in nature. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we d....