TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has claimed the credit of TDS in the return which is also reflected in Form 26AS, the AO cannot refuse to grant credit of the same on technicalities. In this view of the mater, AO is directed to delete the addition and allow the credit of TDS self assessment tax as reflected in Form 26AS. Thus Ground No. 1 to 3 of the assessee are allowed. - ITA No. 27/JP/2022 - - - Dated:- 8-3-2022 - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, JM And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM For the Assessee : Shri P.C. Parwal, CA For the Revenue : Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 27-08-2021, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference by both the parties in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 86 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the ld.AR of the assessee filed a condonation application dated 16-01-2022 mentioning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the appeal is allowed. 4.0 The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal on the ground of non maintainable since no order u/s 143(1) was filed. Further Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal being belated appeal but the fact remains that the assessee has filed the appeal against order u/s 143(1) r.w.s. 154 dt. 15.06.2019 on 22.06.2019, thus very much within the limitation period. Hence, the order of CIT(A) is factually incorrect and deserved to be quashed. 2. The Ld. AO has erred in law as well on the facts and circumstances of the case in making addition of ₹ 2,62,930/- without any basis and ground within the meaning of section 56 of IT Act, 1961 and the CIT(A) has erred in not giving any finding thereon. 3. The Ld. AO has erred in law as well on the facts and circumstances of the case in not giving the credit of TDS of ₹ 56,122/- u/s 194A and self assessment tax of ₹ 7,230/- u/s 140A of IT Act, 1961 though shown in 26AS of assessee pertaining to relevant AY and the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not giving any finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son. But appellant has not provided any reason. On this ground also appeal is dismissed. 5.2 During the course of hearing, the ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi has dismissed the appeal of the assessee only on technical nature basis and not decided the appeal on merit for which the ld.AR of the assessee filed the following written submission. 1. At the outset it is submitted that the assessee by mistake has incorrectly mentioned section 143(1) in column number 2(a) of Form No.35 as against section 143(1) r.w.s. 154. Accordingly he has not filed the copy of intimation u/s 143(1) but has filed the copy of intimation u/s 154 against which the present appeal is filed. The date of intimation u/s 154 is 15.06.2019 against which the assessee has filed the appeal on 22.06.2019. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is within time. Further no order number was mentioned in Form No.35 as the same was not mentioned in intimation u/s 154. Thus, various reasons given by the Ld. CIT(A) for dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee is only technical in nature and thereby not deciding the appeal on merit is bad in law. 2. Without prejudice to abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23). Further in the intimation u/s 143(1) dt. 15.04.2019 (copy enclosed) , AO has allowed the credit of TDS of ₹ 56,122/- and self assessment tax of ₹ 7,230/- whereas the same was not allowed in the intimation u/s 154 dt. 15.06.2019. The fact that tax of ₹ 56,122/- was deducted from assessee s income and assessee had paid self assessment tax of ₹ 7,230/- is also verifiable from Form 26AS. The Hon ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench in case of Shri Amit Mantri Vs. DCIT ITA No.151/JP/21 order dt. 04.01.2022 (copy enclosed) has held that where assessee has claimed the credit of TDS in the return which is also reflected in Form 26AS, the AO cannot refuse to grant credit of the same on technicalities. In view of above, AO be directed to delete the addition of ₹ 2,62,930/- and allow the credit of TDS self assessment tax as reflected in Form 26AS. 5.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 5.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the original return of income on 31-10-2017 which was revised on 31-05-2018 declaring to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the intimation u/s 143(1) is an intimation r.w.s. 154 of the Act and the the ld. CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merit which is dated 15-06-2019 u/s 143(1) of the Act and in fact that matches in Form No. 35 also instead of technical latches. 5.5 From the available records before us, Form 26AS shows interest received from Ashu Mahawar at S.No.1 at ₹ 8,20,307 then at S.No.2 at ₹ 5,53,970 and negative figure of ₹ 8,20,307 at S.No.3. Thus, the effective interest as per that 26AS is ₹ 5,53,970/- only. Apart from this interest at ₹ 5,53,970/-, the assessee in the return has shown interest from saving bank account at ₹ 387/-, interest on FDR at ₹ 7,246/- and interest on IT refund at ₹ 3,020/-, totalling to ₹ 5,64,623/-. Thus, AO(CPC) has incorrectly held that income from other sources as per Form 26AS is ₹ 8,27,553/-, thereby making addition of ₹ 2,62,930/- (8,27,553-5,64,623). The ld.AR of the assessee has drawn our attention that income from Ashu Mahawar is effectively taxable at ₹ 5,53,970 only. As the entry in Form No. 26AS at Sr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
