IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, MUM BAI . , , BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM & SHRI AMIT SHUKL A, JM ./ ITA NO. 1592/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) D C I T 2(1) / VS. M/S. BORAX MORARJI LTD. ROOM NO. 561, 5 TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI 400020 PROSPECT CHAMBERS 317/21, DR. D.N. ROAD FORT, MUMBAI 400001 ./ PAN AAACB0507E / APPELLANT !' / RESPONDENT # $ / APPELLANT BY: SHRI AKHILENDRA YADAV !' # $ / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI V.G. GINDE %& # ' / DATE OF HEARING: 02.12.2014 ()* # ' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02.12.2014 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-4, MUMBAI AND IT PE RTAINS TO AY 2009-10. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ALL THE FIV E GROUNDS RELATES TO INVOKING OF PROVISO TO SECTION 155(14) OF THE ACT F OR DIRECTING THE AO TO GIVE CREDIT OF TDS IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF MAKING ASSESS MENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. 3. THE FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CLAIM TDS C REDIT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR AN AMOUNT OF ` 4,88,733/-. DURING THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS A CERTIFICATE WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO BUT THE AO R EJECTED THE SAME AND PASSED AN ORDER US 154 OF THE ACT. ASSESSEE MADE A CLAIM FOR INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 155(14) OF THE ACT. AS THE AO REJECTED THE SAME THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE CIT(A) AND REPEATED THE SAM E CLAIM. THE CIT(A) ITA NO. 1592/MUM/2013 M/S. BORAX MORARJI LTD. 2 HEARD THE ASSESSEE AND GRANTED RELIEF AS PER THE DI SCUSSION GIVEN IN PARA 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH READS AS UNDER: - 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUB MISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. SECTION 155(15) PROVIDES FOR ALLOWING CRE DIT FOR TDS CERTIFICATES IN SUCH A SITUATION WHERE THE CLAIM HA S NOT BEEN MADE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLE TED OR THE RETURN HAS BEEN PROCESSED U/S. 143(1), THEREFORE, A.O. IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER VERIFYING THE TDS CERTI FICATES AND THE CONDITIONS MENTIONED U/S. 155(14) OF I.T. ACT. IN R ESULT, THE GROUND OF THE APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. 4. BEFORE US THE LEARNED D.R. ESSENTIALLY RELIED UPON THE ARGUMENTATIVE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND MENTIONED THAT THE SAID PROVISION RELATES TO INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT. 5. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES WE PERUSED THE SAID SUB-S ECTION (14) OF SECTION 155 WHICH READS AS UNDER: - WHEN IN THE ASSESSMENT FOR ANY PREVIOUS YEAR OR IN ANY INTIMATION OR DEEMED INTIMATION UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 143 FOR ANY PREVIOUS YEAR, ..... THE ABOVE OPENING LINE OF THE SUB-SECTION CLEARLY M ENTIONS THAT THE ASSESSMENT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2(8) CONNOTES TH E ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) REASSESSMENT ALSO IN ADDITION TO THE INTIMATION OR DEEMED INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT. THEREFO RE, THE ARGUMENT RAISED BY REVENUE IN THE GROUND IS UNSUSTAINABLE. THE CONC LUSIONS DRAWN BY THE CIT(A) IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED PARA WERE FAIR AND RE ASONABLE AND IT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE REJECTED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. +, - # . +- # - /0 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND DECEMBER, 2014. # ()* . 2%, 02.12.2014 ) # 3& SD/- SD/- ( AMIT SHUKLA ) ( D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 4& MUMBAI, 2% DATED: 2 ND DECEMBER, 2014 ITA NO. 1592/MUM/2013 M/S. BORAX MORARJI LTD. 3 COPY TO: 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. !' / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( )/ THE CIT(A) 4, MUMBAI 4. / THE CIT 2, MUMBAI CITY 5. 563 !%78 , ' 78 , 4& THE DR, B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 39 :& / GUARD FILE. % / BY ORDER '5 ! //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR , 4& ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.