Vishal Pachisia v. ITO - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Mukesh Padamchand Sogani v. ACIT 2023 TaxPub(DT) 853 (Pune-Trib)
REFERRED Incredible Unique Buildcon (P) Ltd. v. Office of the ITO 2023 TaxPub(DT) 3927 (Del-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 394 (Kol-Trib) IN THE ITAT KOLKATA SMC BENCH, RAJESH KUMAR, A.M. & SONJOY SARMA, J.M. Vishal Pachisia v. ITO, I.T.A. No. 764/KOL/2023 A.Y. 2016-17 7 November 2023 Assessee by: Miraj D. Shah, A/R. Department by: Ankur Goyal, JCIT, Sr. D/R. ORDER *Rajesh Kumar, A.M.* This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to Ld. CIT(A)) dated 08-5-2023 for the Assessment Year (in short AY) 2016-17. 2. At the outset, we notice that there is a delay of 17 days in filing the appeal which was stated to be on account of the assessee being out of station and filing of the appeal only after returning to the station. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record we find that the appeal is for sufficient reasons and therefore, the same is condoned. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee in various grounds of appeal is against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order of the assessing officer (in short ld. 'AO'), CPC passed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 26-6-2018 wherein the credit for TDS deducted at source by the employer of Rs. 3,96,700 was not allowed. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee is a salaried employee employed with M/s. Falcon Tyres Ltd. at its Kolkata office and during the year received salary of Rs. 17,40,264. The employer deducted the TDS from the salaries of the assessee of Rs. 3,96,700. However, the same was not deposited in the Government treasury. The assessee filed the return of income on 30-3-2018 and claimed the credit for TDS deducted at source of Rs. 4,10,292. However, the assessing officer, CPC allowed the credit to the tune of Rs. 13,592 in respect of TDS deducted at source thereby denying the credit of Rs. 3,96,700 to the assessee on the ground that the same was not deposited by the employer M/s. Falcon Tyres Ltd. in the Government treasury. 5. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the order passed by the assessing officer, CPC on the ground TDS deducted at source of Rs. 3,96,700 by the employer has not been deposited in the Government treasury and therefore, the assessee is not entitled to claim the credit thereof and thus, justified the upholding of the order passed by the assessing officer, CPC. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 394 (Kol-Trib)

IN THE ITAT KOLKATA SMC BENCH,

RAJESH KUMAR, A.M. & SONJOY SARMA, J.M.

Vishal Pachisia v. ITO,

I.T.A. No. 764/KOL/2023

A.Y. 2016-17

7 November 2023

Assessee by: Miraj D. Shah, A/R.

Department by: Ankur Goyal, JCIT, Sr. D/R.

ORDER

Rajesh Kumar, A.M.

This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to Ld. CIT(A)) dated 08-5-2023 for the Assessment Year (in short AY) 2016-17.

2. At the outset, we notice that there is a delay of 17 days in filing the appeal which was stated to be on account of the assessee being out of station and filing of the appeal only after returning to the station. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record we find that the appeal is for sufficient reasons and therefore, the same is condoned.

3. The only issue raised by the assessee in various grounds of appeal is against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order of the assessing officer (in short ld. 'AO'), CPC passed under section 143(1) of the Act dated 26-6-2018 wherein the credit for TDS deducted at source by the employer of Rs. 3,96,700 was not allowed.

4. The facts in brief are that the assessee is a salaried employee employed with M/s. Falcon Tyres Ltd. at its Kolkata office and during the year received salary of Rs. 17,40,264. The employer deducted the TDS from the salaries of the assessee of Rs. 3,96,700. However, the same was not deposited in the Government treasury. The assessee filed the return of income on 30-3-2018 and claimed the credit for TDS deducted at source of Rs. 4,10,292. However, the assessing officer, CPC allowed the credit to the tune of Rs. 13,592 in respect of TDS deducted at source thereby denying the credit of Rs. 3,96,700 to the assessee on the ground that the same was not deposited by the employer M/s. Falcon Tyres Ltd. in the Government treasury.

5. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld the order passed by the assessing officer, CPC on the ground TDS deducted at source of Rs. 3,96,700 by the employer has not been deposited in the Government treasury and therefore, the assessee is not entitled to claim the credit thereof and thus, justified the upholding of the order passed by the assessing officer, CPC.