GAJENDRA KAUSHIK, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 447/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5561 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENDER SINGH JCIT DR DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 447/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI GAJENDRA KAUSHIK C/O B-5, BASEMENT, JAIPUR TOWERS, OPP. ALL INDIA RADIO, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 2 (3) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AGZPK 1778 L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI RAJENDER SINGH, JCIT-. DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 16/12/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 /01/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 22-02-2015 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2010-11 RAISING THEREIN SOLITARY GROUND AS UNDER:- LD. CIT(A) ERRED BY UPHOLDING THE DENIAL OF CRED IT OF TDS AMOUNTING TO RS. 33,066/- BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER RESULTING INTO DEMAND OF RS. 10,970/- IN PLACE OF R EFUND CLAIM OF RS. 23,599/-. ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CALLED UPON TO PAY THE DOUBLE TAX, WHEN THE REQUIRED TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE (T DS) WAS ALREADY DEDUCTED BY DEDUCTOR U/S 194H BUT NOT REMIT TED TO THE GOVT./INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT. SECTION 205 OF THE I.T . ACT, 1961 ITA NO. 447/JP/2015 SHRI GAJENDRA KAUSHIK VS. ITO WARD- 2(3), JAIPUR . 2 PUTS BAR AGAINST THE DEMAND OF TAX UPON THE ASSESSE E, TO THE EXTENT OF TO WHICH THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED FROM THE INCO ME. 2.1 NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPIT E OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF THIS HEARING. CONSEQUENTLY THE BENCH IS LEFT WITH NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS, EX PARTE QUA TH E ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING LD. DR AND AFTER PERUSAL OF THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 2.2 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A ) AS UNDER:- 3.1.2 I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSIO N AND ALSO TAKEN A NOTE OF FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE . I HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE INTIMATION U/S 143(1) ISSUED BY CPC, BA NGALORE. IN THIS ROI FILED, ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TDS CREDIT OF RS. 33,066/- DEDUCTED BY TDS DEDUCTOR M/S. GOLD SUKH TRADE INDIA LTD., JAIPUR. ASSESSEE'S A.R. SHRI PRAVIN SARASWAT, CA HA S ALSO FURNISHED A COPY OF FORM 26AS FOR A.Y. 2010-11 (DAT ED 23-02- 2013 DATA UPLOADED). ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME IT IS SEEN THAT THE DEDUCTOR HAS RECTIFIED THE TDS RETURN, REFERENCE LEGEND-B AS MENTIONED IN THE REMARK COLUMN [B RECTIFICATION OR ERROR IN STATEMENT UPLOAD BY THE DEDUCTOR]. ON PERUSAL AND P LAIN READING OF FORM 26AS, IT IS SEEN THAT TDS CREDIT OF RS. 33, 066/- HAS BEEN REVISED BY THE DEDUCTOR M/S. GOLD SUKH TRADE INDIA LTD., MEANING THEREBY TDS CREDIT OF RS. 33,066/- CANNOT BE ALLOWE D TO THE ASSESSEE AS A DEDUCTOR HAS NOT REMITTED THE DEDUCTE D AMOUNT OF RS. 33,066/-. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, I DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERVENE IN THIS GROUND AS THERE IS NO M ISTAKE IN INTIMATION ISSUED U/S 143(1). ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE 'S APPEAL IN GROUND NO. 1,2 & 3 STANDS DISMISSED. THE LD. DR FURTHER CONTENDS THAT WHEN THE DEDUCTOR M/S. GOLD SUKH TRADE INDIA LTD. HAS REVISED THE TDS FORM AND WITHDRAWN TDS PAYABLE TO THE ASSESSEE THEN THE CREDIT CANNOT BE GIVEN TO THE ASS ESSEE. ITA NO. 447/JP/2015 SHRI GAJENDRA KAUSHIK VS. ITO WARD- 2(3), JAIPUR . 3 2.3 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE L D. CIT(A) IS VERY CLEAR SINCE TDS CREDIT IN QUESTION HAS BEEN REVISED BY M/ S. GOLD SUKH TRADE INDIA LTD., THE SAME CANNOT BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSE E. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS UPHELD AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 /01/2 016 SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 28 /01/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- (1) GAJENDRA KAUSHIK, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO,WARD- 2 (3), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 447/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR