TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest income in question. The fact remains that the assessee has offered the interest income to tax in the A.Y.2006-07 and in terms of section 199 of the Act the assessee was entitled to credit for tax deducted at source. The fact that the TDS certificate refers to assessment year 2005-06 is of no consequence. The fact remains that the assessee has not claimed credit for TDS in any other assessment year. The tax deducted at source and paid to the Government is tax actually paid. In the present case the assessee satisfies all the conditions for grant of credit of TDS - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A No. 103/Kol/2014 - - - Dated:- 12-8-2016 - Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM For The Appellant : Shri Rakesh Kr.Das, JCIT.Sr.DR For The Respondent : Shri S.Jhajharia, AR ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the Revenue is against the order dated 01.11.2013 of CIT(A)-XIX Kolkata relating to AY 2006-07. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the revenue read as follows :- Whether on the facts circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A)-XIX, Kolkata was justified in directing to allow the credit of TDS amounting to ₹ 11,42,88 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act ,1961 (e) Part XII of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 (f) Instructions issued by the Board from time to time. As per Rule-74 of the Income Tax Rules,1962 The accounts of a provident fund shall be prepared at intervals of not more than twelve months . The Assessee is complying with the provisions of Rule-74 aforesaid by preparing accounts on Financial Year basis. Audited Accounts signed on 26th September 2006 for the financial year ended on 31st March 2006 along with schedules were filed before the AO. 4. As already stated the income of the Assessee was exempt u/s 10(25)(ii) of the Act and therefore there was no obligation on its part to file return of income. Nevertheless, the Assessee filed return of income for AY 2006-07 in order to claim refund of TDS erroneously deducted by financial institutions in which funds were invested. The return so filed was a belated return as it was filed beyond the time limit specified in Sec.139(1) of the Act for AY 2006-07. However, the Hon ble Gauhati High Court in the case of in case of North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Employees Provident Fund Trust ( NEEPCO EPF TRUST) Vs. Union of India by its judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn for the A.Y-2006-07 even though tds certificate was issued in favour of The C K P Cooperative Bank Ltd . Thus getting confirmation from issuer of bond and deductor of TDS M/s MPVCL and on receipt of TDS Certificate, the Assessee claimed refund of TDS on its return filed for A.Y-2006-07. The Assessee also had deposited confirmation letter dated 10th Nov 2008 given by The C K P Cooperative Bank Ltd to the assessee on 15th Feb 2010 stating the fact that no benefit was claimed by the Bank as the TDS certificate was not in their possession. ITO had issued another letter directly to The C K P Co operative Bank ltd and the bank also vide letter dated 25th June 2011 confirmed directly to the ITO that no benefit was claimed by the bank against TDS certificate of ₹ 11,42,889/- issued by M/s MPVCL in their return for the assessment year 2005-06 and 2006-07. 6. The AO however Vide letter Ref No-ITO /W-31(1)/KoI/Demand/ 2011-12/793 dated-17th Feb 2012, ITO rejected refund application for the reasons that the Assessee s name was not found in the TDS certificate and the year mentioned in the TDS certificate was relevant to AY 2005-06 and not 2006-07. 7. On appeal by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held assessable and that too in the year in which the corresponding income was assessable / taxed. In the instant case, the entire income starting from issue date i.e. from 16th April, 2004 to 31st March, 2006 was considered by BIL ESPF as assessable income for AY 2006-07, hence the appellant is entitled to tax credit- even though TDS certificate was issued in the name of The C K P Cooperative Bank Ltd . 9.3. The Gauhati High Court (supra) held that All income generated by a recognised employees provident fund, was not chargeable to income-tax u/s 10(25)(ii), it was not required to submit or file any return of income-tax, however, in order LO claim refund of TDS erroneously deducted by financial institutions in which fund were invested, petitioner-Trust filed returns, belated filling of return can be no ground for denying refund. The High Court also held that revenue authorities could not take the shelter of technicalities to deny refund of the income-tax deductions made at source, which did not legitimately belong to them. The High Court further held that when there is no due from the assessee, revenue should not act like a small time trader interested in enriching itself u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
