PI Opportunities Fund-I, Bangalore V. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Center, , Bangalore

MA 214/BANG/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 102 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0485 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 02-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 143(1); 254(2)

Judgement Text

MP No.214/Bang/2023 PI Opportunities Fund-I, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER MP No.214/Bng/2023 (Arising out of ITA No.449/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2021-22 PI Opportunities Fund-1 (Trustee – Hasham Premji Private Ltd.) 134, Next Wipro Corporate Office Sarjapur Road Doddakannelli Bangalore 560 035 PAN NO : AABTP6697D Vs. ADIT CPC Bangalore APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Manjunath, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Nischal B., D.R. Date of Hearing : 27.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2023 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This MA filed by the assessee seeking rectification of the order of Tribunal in ITA No.449/Bang/2023 dated 25.7.2023. 2. The ld. A.R. submitted that assessee came in appeal before this Tribunal for non-granting of TDS credit to the tune of Rs.1,27,91,212/-. According to him, the Bench has pronounced that the direction will be given to CPC. However, in final order, the Tribunal remitted the issue to the file of AO/CPC to give opportunity to the assessee as provided in the first proviso to section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] before making any adjustments. Hence, there was a mistake in the order of the Tribunal. MP No.214/Bang/2023 PI Opportunities Fund-I, Bangalore Page 2 of 3 3. The ld. D.R. relied on the order of Tribunal and submitted that there was error in order of the Tribunal, so as to rectify u/s 254(2) of the Act. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In this case, the main grievance of the assessee is that the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the file of ld. AO/CPC instead of deciding the issue itself by directing the AO/CPC to give credit to the tune of Rs.1,27,91,212/-. According to the ld. A.R., the Tribunal has already pronounced the order in the Bench that direction will be given to the CPC. Admittedly, Tribunal given a direction in its order to CPC that due credit of TDS to be given after verification and there is no error in its order as alleged by the ld. A.R. Now the contention of the ld. A.R. is that the Tribunal itself ought to have decided the issue instead of directing CPC to give credit after examination of records in this regard. In our opinion, the argument of the ld. A.R. is totally misconceived. It is not possible to give refund or credit to the assessee without examining the records. Being so, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the file of ld. AO/CPC for due consideration. In these findings of the Tribunal, there is no mistake apparent on record so as to rectify u/s 254(2) of the Act. However, we make it clear that the ld. AO/CPC has to carry out necessary examination of records on this issue within 2 months from the date of receipt of this order. 5. In the result, the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee is dismissed with above observations. Order pronounced in the open court on 27 th Oct, 2023 Sd/- (Beena Pillai) Judicial Member Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated 27 th Oct, 2023. VG/SPS MP No.214/Bang/2023 PI Opportunities Fund-I, Bangalore Page 3 of 3 Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(Judicial) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.