ACIT, UDAIPUR V. M/s. C.K.M. & Company, UDAIPUR

ITA 132/JODH/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7986 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 05-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K KHANDELWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: U C JAIN RAJENDRA JAIN
• Section: 37; 154; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 132/JU/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 THE ACIT, VS M/S C.K.M. & COMPANY, CIRLCE-2, UDAIPUR UDAIPUR PAN NO. AADFC3909P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K. KHANDELWAL RESPONDENT BY : S/SHRI U.C.JAIN / RAJENDRA JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 05.12.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.12.2012 ORDER PER N.K.SAINI, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 23.12.2011 OF CIT(A), UDAIPUR. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE DEP ARTMENT READS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING CREDIT FOR TCS OF RS. 16,26,906/- TO THE ASSESSEE. 2 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2005 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. NIL. THE SAID RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT' IN SHORT] ON 29.3.2007. LATER ON, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT AT R S. 21,74,333/- BUT DID NOT ALLOW THE CREDIT FOR TCS AMOUNTING TO RS. 1 6,26,906/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION ON 10.5.2007 WH ICH WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER DATED 21.11.2007 BY HO LDING THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 206C (1C) OF THE ACT, THE TCS (TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE) HAS TO BE DONE BY THE LESSER (DEPARTMENT OF MINES) FROM THE LESSEE I.E. MINE OWNER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBS ERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO CONTRACT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF MI NING FOR COLLECTION OF EXCESS ROYALTY FROM MARBLES MINES LESSEE AND SINCE IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT LESSEE U/S 206C(1C) OF THE ACT, SO COULD NOT CLAIM CREDIT OF TCS BECAUSE IT WAS DUE TO THE LESSEE AND IF THE TAX HAS BEEN COLLECTED FROM THE ASSESSEE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES, THE A SSESSEE SHOULD HAVE RECOVERED THE SAME FROM THE MINE OWNERS. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEA L TO THE LD CIT(A) AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAD BEEN INCORPORATED BY THE LD CIT(A) IN PARA 3.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ARE REPRODUCED VERBATIM AS UNDER:- '01. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE WAS AWARDED A CONTRACT FROM MINING DEPARTMENT TO COLLEC T EXCESS ROYALTY OF 3 MINERAL SERPENTINE MARBLES FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.200 3 TO 31.03.2005. IN VIEW OF THE APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 206C (1C) TO PARKIN G LOT, TOLL PLAZA OR MINING AND QUARRYING, THE MINING DEPARTMENT COLLECTED TCS @2.444% AMOUNTING TO RS. 1626907- ON THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF RS.725002 80/-. ACCORDINGLY, THE MINING DEPARTMENT DEPOSITED THE SAID AMOUNT OF TAX TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ON 31.03.2005 ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND ISSUED A TCS CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO. 27D FOR RS. 1626907/- TO TH E APPELLANT-ASSESSEE. THE TAX COLLECTOR ALSO FILED TCS RETURN IN FORM NO.27E TO THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THE DETAILS OF THE TAX COLLECTED FROM THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE. 2. ON THE STRENGTH OF SUCH TCS CERTIFICATE, THE APPELL ANT-ASSESSEE CLAIMED CREDIT OF RS.1626907/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILE D BEFORE THE ID. AO. HOWEVER, WHILE ISSUING THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1), THE ID. AO HAS NOT GIVEN CREDIT OF THE SAID TCS OFRS.1626906/-. 3. THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT STATING THAT WHILE GRANTING THE REFUND OF TAX, A CREDIT OF TCS O F RS.1626906/- WAS NOT GIVEN. THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE INTER-ALIA ALSO FURNISHED COPIES OF CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM THE MINING DEPARTMENT TO THE EFFECT OF TCS OF RS.1626907/-, RECEIPTED CHALLAN DATED 31.03.2005 FOR RS.1626907/- IN RESPE CT OF TCS AND RETURN OF TCS IN FORM NO.27E AND REQUESTED THE ID. AO TO ALLOW CREDIT OF TCS SO MADE BY THE MINING DEP ARTMENT. 4. THE ID. AO DID NOT ALLOW CREDIT OF TCS ON THE GROUN D THAT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 206C(1C), TCS HAS TO BE DONE BY THE LESSOR (DEPARTMENT OF MINES) FROM THE LESSEE (MINES OWNER) AND IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT THE LESSEE. HE MENTIONED THAT THE A SSESSEE CANNOT CLAIM THE CREDIT OF TCS BECAUSE IT IS DUE TO THE LESSEE AND I F TAX HAS BEEN COLLECTED FROM THE ASSESSEE BY DEPARTMENT OF MINES, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE RECOVERED THE SAME FROM MINES OWNER. 5. IT IS HUMBLY & RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE JURI SDICTION UNDER SECTION 4 143(1) IS LIMITED. SECTION 143(1) THEN STOOD READ AS UNDER:- '143(1) WHERE A RETURN HAS BEEN MADE UNDER SECTION 139, OR IN RESPONSE TO A NOTICE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTI ON 142, - (I) IF ANY TAX OR INTEREST IS FOUND DUE ON THE BASI S OF SUCH RETURN, AFTER ADJUSTMENT OF ANY TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, ANY ADVAN CE TAX PAID, ANY TAX PAID ON SELF-ASSESSMENT AND ANY AMOUNT PAID OTHERWI SE BY WAY OF TAX OR INTEREST, THEN WITHOUT PREJ UDICE TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2) AN INTIMATION SHALL BE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE SPECIFYING THE SUM SO PAYABLE AND SUCH INTIMATION SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE A NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED UNDER SECTION 156 AND ALL THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHAL L APPLY ACCORDINGLY; AND (II) IF ANY REFUND IS DUE ON THE BASIS OF SUCH RETU RN, IT SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND AN INTIMATION TO THIS EFFECT SH ALL BE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ID. AO WAS REQUIRED TO GRA NT REFUND ON THE BASIS OF RETURN FILED UNDER SECTION 139 WHEREIN COMPLETE DETAILS WE RE FURNISHED, HI THE INSTANT CASE, NO TAX WAS DUE AND AS SUCH, CLAUSE (I) WAS IN APPLICABLE AND REFUND WAS TO BE GRANTED AS PER CLAUSE (II) TO SECTION 143(1) ON THE BASIS OF RETURN FILED. EVEN CLAUSE (I) SPEAKS OF ADJUSTMENT OF ANY AMOUNT PAID. AS STATED ABOVE, THE SAID TCS WAS PAID ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE AND TH EREFORE, NECESSARY ADJUSTMENT THEREOF WAS REQUIRED TO BE MADE. FOR ANY REASON, IF THE ID. AO WAS NOT SATISFIED, HE WAS REQUIRED TO ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2 ) OF THE ACT. 06. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE CLAIM FOR TAX CREDIT AT THE TIME OF FILING ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THERE IS A SPECIFIC COLUMN IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED T O SHOW TOTAL TAX DEDUCTED AND COLLECTED AT SOURCE. AGAINST THE SAID COLUMN, THE F IGURE WRITTEN INCLUDES THE AMOUNT OF SAID TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE. A PERUSAL OF ACKNO WLEDGEMENT OF RETURN SHOWS THAT THE SPECIFIC CLAIM FOR REFUND WAS MADE. THE STATEME NT OF TOTAL INCOME ANNEXED WITH THE RETURN ALSO SHOWS THAT TCS AS PER FORM NO. 27D ENCLOSED AMOUNTING TO RS.1626906/-. THE ORIGINAL TCS CERTIFICATES WERE AL SO MADE AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5 THE SAID TCS CERTIFICATE RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE COLLECTOR DEPOSITED THIS TAX AMOUNT TO THE CREDIT O F THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ON 31.03.2005. IT MAY ALSO BE OBSERVED FROM THE AUDITE D ACCOUNTS ANNEXED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME THAT THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE HAS CL AIMED EXPENDITURE OF RS.72500280/- ON WHICH SUCH TCS HAS BEEN MADE. ALL THESE ARE UNDISPUTED FACTS. ONCE THE DOCUMENTS ATTACHED TO THE RETURN ARE EXAMI NED, CONSIDERED AND NO ERROR THEREIN IS FOUND, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO TAX CREDIT AS CLAIMED BASED ON FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATI ON IN NOT ALLOWING CREDIT OF TAX SO COLLECTED AND DEPOSITED ON BEHALF OF THE APP ELLANT-ASSESSEE. 07. IT IS A WELL SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW THAT SECTION 154 OF THE ACT CAN ONLY BE APPLIED TO A 'MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD.' A 'RECTIFIABLE MISTAKE' IS A MISTAKE WHICH IS OBVIOUS AND NOT SOMETHING, WHICH H AS TO BE ESTABLISHED BY A LONG DRAWN PROCESS OF REASONING. THUS, THE MISTAKE TO BE RECTIFIED MUST BE SELF- EVIDENT AND REACHED WITHOUT DEBATE OR DISSERTATION. WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154, THE ID. AO ANALYSED THE SCOPE AND MEANING OF APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 206C(1C) OF THE ACT AND HELD THAT THE CREDIT OF TCS CAN BE CLAIMED BY THE M INES OWNERS PROVIDED THEY HAVE BEEN ISSUED CERTIFICATE OF TAX SO COLLECTED BY THE COLLECTOR. IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THIS WAS NOT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF SEC TION 154. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DEFINITION OF 'MINING AND QUARRY ING' INSERTED IN THE TABLE UNDER SECTION 206C(1C) AND THIS BEING THE VERY FIRST YEAR OF INSERTION OF SUCH PROVISION, THERE WAS AMBIGUITY AND THIS BEING INTERPRETED TO INCLUDE INCIDENTAL SERVICES AL SO. MOREOVER, THE MINING DEPARTMENT CONFERRED THE RIGHTS TO COLLECT ROYALTY TO THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE, TCS WAS COLLECTED FROM THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE BY TH E COLLECTOR OF TAX IN GOOD SPIRIT OF LAW. SINCE THE TAX WAS COLLECTED FROM THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE AND CERTIFICATE OF TCS WAS ALSO ISSUED TO IT, THUS, THE RE IS NO QUESTION OF ANY CLAIM TO BE MADE BY THE INDIVIDUAL MINES OWNERS. FOR A MOMEN T, EVEN IF IT IS PRESUMED THAT 6 THE COLLECTOR HAS WRONGLY COLLECTED THE TAX FROM TH E APPELLANT-ASSESSEE AND PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN ALSO IT IS TO BE TREATED AS ADVANCE PAYMENT OF TAX ELIGI BLE FOR CREDIT. 08. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SECTION 206C(4) L AYS DOWN THAT ANY AMOUNT SO COLLECTED UNDER SECTION 206C(1) WOULD BE DEEMED AS PAYMENT OF TAX ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND CREDIT SHALL BE GIVEN TO HIM FOR THE AMOUNT SO COLLECTED ON THE PRODUCTION O F CERTIFICATE FURNISHED UNDER SUB-SECTION (5) IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER THIS ACT. THUS, EVERY SUCH BUYER WHO IS SUBJECTED TO TCS FROM THE SPECIFIED AC TIVITIES, AFTER SECURING A CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 206C(5) IS REQUIRED TO PR ODUCE IT ALONGWITH HIS INCOME TAX RETURN AND THEN CREDIT OF TAX SO COLLECTED WOUL D BE GIVEN BY THE AO AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT. BUT, IN THE PRESENT CASE, DESPI TE FULL COMPLIANCE OF THE SAID PROVISIONS BY THE APPELLANT-ASSESSEE, NO CREDI T WAS ALLOWED TO HIM. 09. AS PER SECTION 237 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO REFUND IF THE TAX PAID BY HIM OR TREATED TO HAVE BEEN PAID BY HIM OR ON HIS BEHALF FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, EXCEEDS THE AMOUNT CHARGEABLE UNDER THE ACT FOR A PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR. IN VIEW OF THIS ALSO, WHEN IT WAS PROVED BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE SAID TAX WAS COLLECTED AT SOURCE AND DULY PAID TO T HE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT BY SUCH COLLECTOR ON BEHALF OF THE APPEL LANT-ASSESSEE, THE CREDIT/REFUND OF THE SAME SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DENI ED. UNDER THESE FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND PROVISIONS OF LAW, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED.' 6. THE LD CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN CLAIMIN G THE REFUND FOR TCS AS WELL AS TDS AS ITS INCOME WAS ALREADY SET OFF AGAIN ST CARRY FORWARD LOSSES AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER GAVE THE CREDIT OF TDS AM OUNT BASED ON THE LIST OF CERTIFICATES AS PER COMPUTATION OF INCOME BUT NO CREDIT FOR TCS FROM 7 MINING DEPARTMENT WAS GIVEN. THE LD CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143(1) PROVIDES THAT TAX IS T O BE DETERMINED AFTER GETTING CREDIT OF TDS, ADVANCE TAX, SELF ASSESSMENT TAX AND ANY OTHER AMOUNT OTHERWISE BY WAY OF TAX WHICH HAD NOT BEEN D ONE IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, THERE WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT ON T HE RECORD AS THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES HAD ALREADY FILED RETURN U/S 20 6C IN FORM NO. 27E ON 30.6.2005, WHICH REVEALED THAT RS. 16,26,907/- WAS TCS COLLECTED FROM THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS DEPOSITED TO THE CREDIT OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ON 31.3.2005 IN PNB (CODE 300576) BY CHALLAN NO. 35 AN D TAX COLLECTION CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED ON 8.4.2005 TO THE ASSESSEE. FROM NO. 27D WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 206C(5) OF THE ACT BASED ON THAT CERTIFICATE, THE CREDIT OF TAX WAS SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD C IT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT DUE TAX DEDUCTED BY THE MINING DEPARTMENT HAD BEEN COLLECTED FROM THE ASSESSEE AND IT HAD BEEN DEPOSITED WITH THE CEN TRAL GOVERNMENT, THEREFORE, THE CREDIT FOR THE SAME WAS TO BE PROVID ED AS PER SECTION 143(1)(I) AS NO ADJUSTMENT WAS POSSIBLE U/S 143(1) WHILE DETERMINING THE LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD CIT(A) MENTIONED THAT IN ASSESSEES CASE, THERE WAS A REFUND DUE AS PER SECTION 143(1)(II) OF THE ACT AND FOR DETERMINING THE REFUND, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2 37 OF THE ACT WERE APPLICABLE WHICH PROVIDES THAT IF ANY PERSON SATISF IES THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT AMOUNT OF TAX PAID BY HIM OR IN HIS BEHALF FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR EXCEEDS AMOUNT WITH WHICH HE WAS PROPERLY CHARGEAB LE UNDER THE ACT FOR THE YEAR, HE SHALL BE ENTITLED FOR THE REFUND OF EX CESS. THE LD CIT(A) CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE MINING DEPARTMENT HAS PAID THE TAX ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS EV IDENT FROM FORM NO. 8 27D ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE RETURN FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES, GOVT. OF RAJASTHAN, SO IN VIEW OF PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 143(1) (II) OF THE ACT R.W.S. 237 OF THE ACT, THE REFUND SHOULD HAVE B EEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE . THE LD CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AS P ER SECTION 206(4) OF THE ACT ANY AMOUNT COLLECTED U/S 206C AND PAID AS PER SUB SECTION 3 SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AS REGARDS TO THE OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT CREDIT FO R THIS TCS AMOUNT COULD NOT BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BUT COULD ONLY BE CLAI MED BY THE MINE OWNERS PROVIDED THEY HAD BEEN ISSUED SAID CERTIFICATE, THE LD CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF ANY CLAIM BEING MADE BY THE MINE OWNER WHEN THE TCS CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN ISSUED IN F ORM NO. 27D TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THIS AMOUNT. THE LD CIT(A) ACCORDINGL Y HELD THAT THERE WAS MISTAKE OF NOT GIVING CREDIT FOR TCS U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECTIFIED U/S 154 OF THE ACT. HE ACCORDI NGLY DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR TCS OF RS. 16,26,906 /-. NOW THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL. 7. THE LD DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER AND REITERATED THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY HIM. IN HIS RI VAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUG NED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A). 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES, GOVT. OF RAJA STHAN, COLLECTED TCS 9 FROM THE ASSESSEE AND MENTIONED THIS FACT IN THE RE TURN FILED IN FORM NO.27-E ON 30.6.2005, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT P AGE NOS.5 TO 18 OF THE ASSESSEES COMPILATION. IN THE SAID RETURN, THE N AME OF THE ASSESSEE IS APPEARING AT S.NO.1 OF PAGE NO.8, WHEREIN IT IS MEN TIONED IN COLUMN NO.8 THAT TCS FOR RS. 16,26,907/- WAS COLLECTED. THE D EPARTMENT OF MINES ISSUED FORM NO. 27D TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS FURNI SHED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. HOWEVER, THE BENEFIT FO R THE SAID TAX COLLECTED WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETU RN OF INCOME PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLIC ATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH WAS REJECTED BUT THE LD CIT(A) ON APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR OPINION, THE LD CIT(A) WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN DIRECTING TO ALLOW TH E CREDIT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR TCS OF RS. 16,26,906/- WHICH HAD BEEN COLLECTED FROM IT AND WAS DULY DEPOSITED IN THE GOVT TREASURY. THE LD CIT(A) VERI FIED THIS FACTS FROM FORM NO.27D ISSUED BY DEPARTMENT OF MINING, GOVT. O F RAJASTHAN AND FORM NO. 27E FILED BY THE SAID DEPARTMENT. WE, THE REFORE, ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) DO NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATT ER, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THIS APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMI SSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.12.2012 ) SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (N.K.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMER DATED : 20 TH DECEMBER, 2012 RKK 10 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR