Advanced Fertility and Endoscopic Centre, Ahmedabad V. The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 247/AHD/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Advanced Fertility and Endoscopic Centre appealing against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which denied them a TDS credit of Rs. 62,112/- for the assessment year 2020-21. The credit was reflected in Form 26AS for the subsequent assessment year 2021-22, although the corresponding income was offered to tax in 2020-21. The NFAC's decision was based on the timing of the TDS credit's reflection in the subsequent year, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Ahmedabad, after hearing the arguments and considering the legal provisions, decided to set aside the matter back to the JAO for a detailed verification and appropriate action regarding the TDS credit claim.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 131389 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Dr. Ajith Kumar Pandey Vs. ITAT (2009) 310 ITR 195 (Patna)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 244A; 234B; 143(1); 195

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Advanced Fertility and Endoscopic Centre, 4 th Floor, Aditi Medical Centre, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 PAN: AAEFA7541G (Appellant) Vs Dy.CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan Ambawadi, Ahmedabad- 380015 (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Vaghe Prasadrav Annasaheb, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 22-08-2023 Date of pronouncement : 25-08-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 17-02-2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising of the intimation order u/s. 143(1) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relevant to the assessment year 2020-21. 2. The registry has noted that there is shortage of Tribunal fee of Rs. 9500/- and assessee has paid only Rs. 500/-. The ld. ITA No. 247/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year 2020-21 I.T.A No. 247/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Page No. Advanced Fertility & Endoscopic Centre vs. Dy. CIT 2 counsel, Shri Sanjay R. Shah, appearing for the assessee clarified as per section 253 sub-clause 6, clauses a, b & c provides that fees as mentioned therein should be determined on the basis of total income of the assessee, as mentioned in those clauses. Clause d is a case where what is not mentioned in the above clauses a, b & c and the prescribed fee of Rs. 500/- is payable as a Tribunal Fee. The issue in the present appeal is there is no change in the total income as admitted by the assessee and determined by the Revenue under 143(1) proceedings. Therefore, the assessee has paid fee of Rs. 500/- which is correct in law and also relied upon by Patna High Court Judgment in the case of Dr. Ajith Kumar Pandey Vs. ITAT reported in (2009) 310 ITR 195 (Patna) wherein it is held as follows:- “3. A look at the sub-section would make it abundantly clear that in the case an appeal is filed on or after October 1,1998, the appeal must be accompanied by a fee of what has been provided in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the said sub-section. Clauses (a), (b) and (c) provides that fees as mentioned therein should be determined on the basis of total income of the assessee as mentioned in those clauses. Therefore, in the case of an appeal where the total income of the assessee is ascertainable from the appeal itself, i.e. when the appellant is seeking to challenge the assessment of his total income, fees as mentioned in clauses (a), (b) and (c) would be required to be paid. Clause (d) of the sub-section deals with other appeals. Imposition of penalty under section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has no connection or bearing with the total income of the assessee A person aggrieved by an order imposing penalty, if approaches the Tribunal by preferring an appeal, imposition of penalty, having no nexus with the total income of the assessee, it would not be discernible what is the total income of the appellant and, accordingly, such an appeal will be covered by clause (d). Furthermore, the important words used in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of the sub-section are "total income of the assessee" Therefore, the appellant must be an assessee and the appeal must demonstrate what is his total income in the case of imposition of penalty that may not be discernible.” I.T.A No. 247/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Page No. Advanced Fertility & Endoscopic Centre vs. Dy. CIT 3 3. Respectfully following the above judgment, we find that the fees of Rs. 500/- paid by the assessee is proper and therefore we are admitting the present appeal and proceed with adjudication. 4. The solitary grievance of the assessee is that not allowing TDS credit of Rs. 62,112/- as the same is reflecting in Form 26AS in TDS Reconciliation Analysis and Correction Enabling System (TRACES) but this amount reflecting in the subsequent assessment year 2021-2022 whereas the assessee offered corresponding income in the assessment year 2020-21. Further, the CPC Centre has charged interest of Rs. 10,172/- and Rs. 3139/- u/s. 234B and 234C of the Act, whereas as per assessee’s Return of income, the Return resulted in refund along with interest u/s. 144A of the Act. During the appellate proceedings, the NFAC held that the amount of Rs. 62,112/- is reflected in 26AS for the assessment year 2021- 22 for which credit will be given for assessment year 2021-22. Accordingly, the assessee is directed to claim for this credit during the assessment year 2021-22, thereby rejected the claim made by the assessee and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed this appeal raising the following grounds of appeal: “Your Appellant, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Assessing Officer), presents this appeal on the following amongst other grounds of appeal which are without prejudice to one another. “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and on facts of case by not allowing TDS credit of I.T.A No. 247/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Page No. Advanced Fertility & Endoscopic Centre vs. Dy. CIT 4 Rs 62,112/- while upholding the intimation dated 28/03/2021 processed us. 143(1) of the Act in spite of the fact that the Appellant has offered corresponding income to tax in the return of income for the year under consideration and thus rightly claimed the same in AY 2020-21 u/s 199 of the Act 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC has erred in law and on facts of case by not considering the facts that the TDS credit of Rs 62,112/- is reflected in the subsequent year i.e. in the assessment year 2021-22 though it pertains to AY 2020-21 and the Appellant is entitled to get credit of the same in AY 2020-21 as the corresponding income is offered to tax in AY 2020-21 which fact is not disputed. 3. The Appellant prays that the Learned Assessing Officer be directed to allow credit of TDS of Rs 62,112/- in assessment year 2020-21 and delete the consequent interest charged of Rs 10,172/- and Rs 3139/- u/s 234B and 234C of the Act and allow the refund to the Appellant along with interest u/s 244A of the Act 4. Your Appellant reserves the right to add alter amend and/or withdraw any of the above Grounds of Appeal.” 6. Heard rival contentions and perused the material on record and the paper book filed by the assessee which contains From No. 26AS for the relevant assessment years 2020-21 and 2021-22. During the hearing, the specific question was raised by the Bench whether the assessee made TDS claim of Rs. 62,112/- in the subsequent assessment year 2021-22, for which the assessee stated that the Return of Income for that year is to be verified. However, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Mr. Sanjay R. Shah, requested that the matter may be restored back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for verification of the same and allow the claim in accordance with law. I.T.A No. 247/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Page No. Advanced Fertility & Endoscopic Centre vs. Dy. CIT 5 7. The ld. Departmental Representative, Shri Vaghe Prasadrav Annasaheb, appearing for the Revenue has no objection in setting aside the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for verification of the same. 8. Recording the above statement, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed by setting aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to verify the claim of TDS credit of Rs. 62,112/- and allow the same in accordance with law. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2023 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 25/08/2023 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद