ACIT, CHENNAI V. Chevron Petroleum India Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 561/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4065 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOPI KRISHNA
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR; A SUSHMA HARINI

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.561/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI 34. VS M/S. CHEVRON PETROLEUM INDIA PVT. LTD., NO.108, ARMENIAN STREET, KING & PATRIDGE, CATHOLIC CENTRE, CHENNAI 600 001. PAN: AAACT4291P ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI GOPI KRISHNA, JCIT /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR & MS. A. SUSHMA HARINI, ADVOCATES /DATE OF HEARING : 03.05.2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.07.2017 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS)-1, CHENNAI DATED 29.12.2016 IN ITA NO.152/CIT(A)-1/201 5-16 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 PASSED U/S.250(6) R.W.S.143 (3) OF THE ACT. 2 ITA NO.561/MDS/2017 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THREE GROUNDS IN ITS AP PEAL, HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN GRANTING RELIEF TO THE TUNE OF RS.11,69,646/- FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 WITH RESPECT TO THE TAX CREDIT ARISING OUT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON 27.09.2012 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AS NI L. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND FINALLY ORDER WAS PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT ON 25.03.2015, WHE REIN THE LD.AO REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS TA X CREDIT ARISING OUT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD.AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TAX CREDIT OF RS.11,69,606 /- FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE TAX CREDIT OF RS.11,69,606/- WAS TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE FROM THE RECEIPT OF RS.1,14,71,969/- WHICH WAS OFFERED AS IN COME IN THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 & 2011-12 BY THE ASSESSEE. FOR THOSE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID THE TAX. H OWEVER THE LD.AO OPINED THAT THOUGH THE AMOUNT OF RS.11,69,606 /- WAS SHOWN AS TAX CREDIT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2012-13, AS PER FORM 26AS THE BENEFIT OF THE SAME CANNOT BE GRA NTED TO THE 3 ITA NO.561/MDS/2017 ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS BOOKED THE RECEIP T DURING THE EARLIER FINANCIAL YEARS AND NOT DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. HOWEVER, ON APPEAL THE LD.CIT(A) GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 6. SIMILAR STANDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE ITAT, CHE NNAI, IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. G.D. GOPAL (1 ITD 946), ITAT, CALCU TTA IN KEDIA TEXTILES PVT. LTD VS. IAC AND ITAT, AMRITSAR IN THE CASE OF SOCIETED ENGINEERING VS. ACIT (65 SOT 45). IN THE CASE OF KEDIA TEXTILES (31 TTJ 401), THE HONBLE CALCUTTA T RIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT UNLESS TDS IS DEPOSITED WITH THE EXCHEQUE R AND PROOF IS FILED, THE DEDUCTEE WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO TAKE CREDIT. 7. IN THE CASE OF TOYO ENGG INDIA LTD VS. JCIT (10 0 TTJ 373), THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT IT MAY N OT BE POSSIBLE ALL THE TIME TO CORRELATE A SPECIFIC AMOUN T OF TDS WITH A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE IN A PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT HAS FURTHER HELD TH AT THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE TDS AND THE INCOME EARNED IS NOTIONAL A ND CONCEPTUAL RATHER THAN SPECIFIC AND IMMEDIATE. 4. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND MERIT IN THE ORDER OF TH E LD.CIT(A). AS OBSERVED BY THE LD.CIT(A), SECTION 199 OF THE AC T COME TO THE RESCUE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSE E, THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID THE TAX DUE IN THE YEAR IN WHICH HE HAS DE CLARED THE RECEIPT OF RS. 1,14,71,969/- AGAINST WHICH TDS OF R S.11,69,606/- WAS DEDUCTED AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CLAIMED THE T AX CREDIT DURING THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE DEDUCTOR OF THE T DS HAD MISTAKENLY STATED IN THE FORM 26A THAT THE TAX WAS DEDUCTED DURING 4 ITA NO.561/MDS/2017 THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND ACCORDINGLY ISSUED THE ASSESSEE WITH THE FORM 26AS THOUGH THE TAX WAS DEDUCTED IN T HE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN CONTROL OF SUCH ACT OF THE TAX DEDUCTOR. MO REOVER THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE TAX DEDUCTOR AS INCOME DURING THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS WHEN SUCH AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED AND PAID THE TAX THAT WAS DUE. IN THIS SITUATION, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE TAX DED UCTED BY THE DEDUCTOR IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 10 TH JULY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ /CHENNAI, %& /DATED 10 TH JULY, 2017 JR & () *) /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. - ( )/CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. )./ 0 /DR 6. /1 /GF