News Update

Former Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveysST - Since Department itself admits that service carried out by appellant is that of 'Mining Services' w.e.f. 01.06.2007, thus demand for earlier period has been made only to fasten excess Service Tax demand on appellant which cannot sustain: CESTATICG rescues fisherman with head injury onboard IFB St. Francis off the Gujarat coastCX - When physical stock verification carried out by Officers was not fool proof and there were anomalies, benefit of doubt should be extended to assessee, duty demand confirmed on alleged clandestine removal is not sustainable: CESTAT
 
I-T - Whether Revenue is under obligation to allow TDS Credit even if deductors have not issued TDS Certificates nor properly uploaded details in Form 26AS - YES: ITAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, OCT 22, 2013: THE issue before the Bench is - Whether Revenue is under obligation to allow TDS Credit even if deductors have not issued TDS Certificates nor properly uploaded details in Form 26AS. And the verdict goes in favour of the assessee.

Facts of the case

Assessee, a company, had claimed TDS of Rs. 215163912, out of which claim of Rs. 1,65,20,93,44/- was made in the original return and further claim of Rs.14,271,296 was made in the revised return filed on 13.4.2009. Thereafter during assessment, assessee had made further claim of Rs. 35,683,272/- vide letter dated 28.12.2010. AO however gave TDS credit only to the tune of Rs 118,960,393/-. On appeal, CIT(A) directed the assessee to furnish all TDS certificates in original before AO, who was directed to verify the claim of credit of TDS and to allow TDS as per original challans available on record or as per details of such TDS available on computer system of the department.

On appeal before the Tribunal, the AR submitted that the AO disallowed the TDS credit because of the discrepancy with respect to the credit shown in the Form No. 26AS which was not correct. It was argued that credit of TDS had to be given on the basis of TDS certificates and in case TDS certificates were not available, on the basis of details and evidence furnished by the assessee regarding deduction of tax at source. Reference was made to the recent judgment of Delhi HC in case of Court On Its Own Motion Vs. CIT, in which the HC directed the department to ensure that the credit was given to the assessee on the basis of details and evidences furnished, where the deductor did not upload the correct details in Form 26AS. It was further pointed out that new system of Form 26AS was applicable only from AY 2009-10 and was not applicable in the case of the assessee. Therefore, it was requested that the Department might be directed to allow TDS credit on the basis of TDS certificate or indemnity bond and on the basis of credit shown in the form 26AS.

Having heard the parties, the Tribunal held that,

++ difficulty faced by the tax payer in the matter of credit of TDS had been considered by the High Court of Bombay in case of Yashpal Sahwney Vs. DCIT in which it was held that even if the deductor had not issued TDS certificate, the claim of the assessee has to be considered on the basis of evidence produced for deduction of tax at source as the Revenue was empowered to recover the tax from the person responsible if he had not deducted tax at source or after deducting failed to deposit with Central Government. High Court of Delhi in case of Court On Its Own Motion Vs. CIT have also directed the department to ensure that credit is given to the assessee, where deductor had failed to upload the correct details in Form 26AS on the basis of evidence produced before the department. Therefore, the department was required to give credit for TDS once valid TDS certificate had been produced or even where the deductor had not issued TDS certificates on the basis of evidence produced by assessee regarding deduction of tax at source and on the basis of indemnity bond. We, therefore modify the order passed by CIT(A) on this point and direct the AO to proceed in the manner discussed above to give the credit of tax deducted at source to the assessee;

++ second dispute is regarding grant of interest on interest. It has been submitted by AR that the assessee was entitled for interest on the excess tax paid which had not been given to assessee and, therefore, from the due date of interest, further interest had to be allowed on the interest due. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of SC in case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. CIT And Others. In case the assessee has paid excess advance tax or excess TDS, the assessee is liable for refund with interest and in case the interest is not granted on the due date, the assessee is liable for further interest on interest, in view of the Judgment of Supreme Court in case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. CIT and others. We, therefore, direct the AO to allow the assessee interest on interest if due as per law in the light of Judgment of Supreme Court in case of Sandvik Asia Ltd.

(See 2013-TIOL-885-ITAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.