ANIL VASANTRAO DESHPANDE,ATHNI V. CPC, BANGALORE

ITA 300/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Anil Vasantrao Deshpande, an electrical contractor, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which partly sustained the denial of his claim for TDS credits by the Assessing Officer/CPC. Initially, the assessee claimed a TDS credit of Rs.2,72,534/- for the assessment year 2021-22, which was later restricted to Rs.47,105/- by the CPC. After several rectification petitions and appeals, the CIT(A) confirmed the CPC's action, leading to the current appeal before the ITAT. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence submitted by the assessee and decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633081 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DESHMUKH SPRAKASH.
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD Y VAIDHYA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; TDS; Rectification of order

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos.300/PAN/2024 (A.Y. 2021-22 ) Anil Vasantrao Deshpande, 2380-81,Opp Govt Hospital, Main Road, Athni, Belagavi-591304, Karnataka. Vs . National e – Assessment Centre/CPC Delhi-110001 . PAN .No. ABBPV6436F (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Pramod Y Vaidhya.AR Revenue by Shri.DeshmukhSPrakash.Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 05.06.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 10.06.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the NFAC Delhi/CIT (A) passed u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) partly sustaining the denial of claim of TDS by the Assessing Officer/CPC. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse is engaged in the business as electrical contractor.. The assesse has filed the return of income for A.Y.2021-22 on 11-03--2022 disclosing a total income of Rs.19,94,830/- 2 ITA. No. 300/PAN/2024 Anil Vasantrao Deshpande. and claiming the TDS credit of Rs.2,72,534/- Subsequently the return of income was processed u/sec143(1) of the Act on 6-06-2022 restricting the TDS claim to the extent of Rs.47,105/-.The assesse has filed rectification petition u/sec154 of the Act on 5.07.2022 and the CPC has allowed the TDS credit vide order dated 25.08.2022. Further ADIT CPC has passed another rectification order u/sec154 of the Act on 2.11.2022 restricting the claim of TDS. 3. Aggrieved by the order u/sec154 of the Act dated 2.11.2022, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, submissions and findings of the AO and dealt on the provisions under Rule37BA of the I T Rules and confirmed the action of the CPC/AO on claim of TDS credit and granted marginal relief in the other grounds of appeal and partly allowed the assesse appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assesse has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the CPC/A.O overlooking the facts and submissions of the assesse in the proceedings. The Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in not giving the credit to the TDS based on the Form.No26AS though the income was offered in the hands 3 ITA. No. 300/PAN/2024 Anil Vasantrao Deshpande. of partnership firm and HUf. Further the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and has filed an application for admission of the additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT rules. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the evidences were not examined by the lower authorities and the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue that the CIT(A) has erred in partially confirming the action of the A.O. in respect of denial of TDS credits as the transactions are not supported with the documentary evidences and explanations. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has submitted the details as called for by the authorities. The assesse is filling the application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 29 of ITAT rules along with the details/ information substantiating the claim placed at S.no.19 t0 83 of the paper book which could not be submitted before the lower authorities and the return of income was processed u/sec143(1) of the Act. Further the evidences play a important role in decision making in the adjudicating proceedings. Therefore considering the facts, circumstances and additional evidences, the assessee should not suffer for non filing of material information, as the evidences play a vital role in decision making and we admit the additional evidence. Accordingly, to meet the ends of justice, we 4 ITA. No. 300/PAN/2024 Anil Vasantrao Deshpande. restore the disputed issue along with the additional evidence to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information . And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10.06.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 10/06/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji 5 ITA. No. 300/PAN/2024 Anil Vasantrao Deshpande. Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed "