KRISHNA PRAKASH GOEL,BAREILLY V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), BAREILLY

ITA 491/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Krishna Prakash Goel, the appellant, who contested the reduction of his claimed Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) credit by the CPC, Bengaluru, from Rs. 3,43,015 to Rs. 1,35,561. The Income Tax Officer's assessment and the subsequent dismissal of his appeal by the Ld. First Appellate Authority led to his approach to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present his case and thus remanded the case back for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824768 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 24-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.R.N. SHUKLA
• Keywords: Business income; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice; TDS; FORM 26AS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.491/LKW/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Krishna Prakash Goel Flat No.910, Tulip Grace Tower IVri Road, Izzatnagar Bareilly (U.P) v. The Income Tax Officer 1(1) Bareilly - New TAN/PAN:ADMPG6472F (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by: None Respondent by: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 28.05.2025, passed by the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Nashik for Assessment Year 2023-24. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed his return of income on 24.07.2023, declaring a total income of Rs.2,27,620/-. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) by the CPC, Bengaluru, which assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.2,27,620/- and disallowed the Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) credit of 2,07,454/-. The CPC had reduced the TDS credit to Rs.1,35,561/- against the TDS claim made by the assessee of Rs.3,43,015/- and raised a demand of Rs.1,41,660/-, vide order dated 29.12.2023. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.491/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 5 3.0 Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority, who dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the order of the AO. 4.0 Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Nashik, by raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and Assessing officer have erred in allowing credit of TDS amounting to Rs.135561/- instead of Rs.343015/- as claimed in the return as well as reflected in Form 26AS also. 2. That the Ld. authorities have altogether ignored full facts brought on record by the assessee without any reason and justification. 3. That the whole order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) is arbitrary against facts, law and natural justice and has been passed without giving proper opportunity. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal either before or at the time of appeal. 5. None was present for the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing. However, an application dated 30.11.2025, seeking adjournment, on behalf of Shri Suyash Agarwal, Advocate, was placed before me citing the reason that paper book was required to be filed in this appeal and, therefore, the appeal may be adjourned. However, looking into facts of the case, I reject Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.491/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 5 the adjournment application and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 5.0 The Ld. Sr. D.R. placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 6.0 I have heard the Ld. Sr. D.R. and have also perused the material on record. The Ld. First Appellate Authority, vide paragraph 6.6 of the impugned order observed as under: “6.6 From the above as per available record it is seen that the gross receipt shown on sale of land/property in the ITR claimed by the appellant is Rs.1,10,00,000/- w.r.t total sales amount of Rs.3,30,00,000/-. However, TDS was deducted by the deductor at Rs.3,30,000/- on the whole payment of Rs.3,30,00,000/- which is shown in the ITR of the appellant. Further on perusal of submission filed by the appellant it is seen that the other two joint owners of the property has shown their respective share of sales in his ITR and was not claimed TDS in his ITR for the relevant assessment year.” 7.0 The claim of the assessee before the Ld. First Appellate Authority was that the assessee, along with his two sisters, was the joint owner of the property under consideration and the shares of the sisters therein were also shown in the return filed by the assessee. The Ld. First Appellate Authority, in the absence of any supporting evidence to demonstrate that the sisters of the assessee had not claimed the TDS, confirmed the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.491/LKW/2025 Page 4 of 5 order of the AO disallowing the claim of the assessee. Looking into the peculiar facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case and, therefore, I restore this file to the Office of the Ld. First Appellate Authority with the direction to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall produce all necessary evidences before the Ld. First Appellate Authority for the purpose of claiming credit of TDS. I also caution the Assessee to fully comply with the notices and directions of the Ld. First Appellate Authority in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the Ld. First Appellate Authority would be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee. 8.0 In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/12/2025. Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:31/12/2025 JJ: Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.491/LKW/2025 Page 5 of 5 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR By order Assistant Registrar/DDO Printed from counselvise.com "