SHYAM SUNDAR JENA,CUTTACK V. ITO,WARD-1(1), CUTTACK

ITA 390/CTK/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shyam Sundar Jena, an individual who earns income from salary and also from the USA. He claimed a credit for tax paid in the USA amounting to Rs.2,33,328 under the head 'TDS' in his income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17. The Assessing Officer initially admitted a mistake in not granting this credit but later denied it due to the filing of the return in ITR-1 instead of ITR-2, which allegedly did not allow for the credit under section 90A. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the assessee did not furnish any information, despite the assessee having submitted written submissions. The Tribunal found that the necessary documentation to support the claim for tax credit from the foreign income was not provided, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26010 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.C.MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP KUMAR JENA
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Shyam Sundar Jena, Dulla Devi Road Kalyani Nagar, Cuttack PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 16/10163161 for the assessment year 2. Shri Sandeep kumar Jena, S.C.Mohanty, Sr. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.390/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shyam Sundar Jena, Dulla Devi Road Kalyani Nagar, Vs. The ITO, Ward Cuttack No.AJEPJ 5491 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 17/10/20 Date of Pronouncement : 17/10/20 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 11.7.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2015 for the assessment year 2016-17. Sandeep kumar Jena, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared for the revenue. P a g e 1 | 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The ITO, Ward-1(1), Respondent) Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv DR 2024 024 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 11.7.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2015- the assessee and Shri ITA No.390/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 2 | 5 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is an individual who derives income in the form of salary from Infosys. He is also deriving income from United State of America (USA). It was the submission that when he has filed his return of income disclosing entire salary receipts, he has claimed credit of tax paid to an extent of Rs.2,83,488/- under the head ‘TDS’. It was the submission that the amount consisted of Rs.2,33,328/-, which was the tax paid in USA. It was the submission that in the intimation issued, the benefit of TDS/tax deducted and paid in a foreign country has not been given benefit of. It was the submission that in an application under section 154 of the Act, the Assessing Officer has admitted that it was a mistake but had further held that the return had been filed in ITR-1 as against ITR-2, and therefore, there was no option to give credit of the relief u/s.90A. It was the submission that on appeal, the assessee had filed written submission before the ld CIT(A), NFAC but the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee recording that the assessee has not furnished any information. It was the submission that the assessee had filed written submission before the ld CIT(A), NFAC on 6.7.2024. ld AR placed the acknowledgement of the details filed which are as follows: ITA No.390/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 3 | 5 “ ITA No.390/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 4 | 5 4. It was the submission that the ld CIT(A) has erred in not considering the written submission filed. 5. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A). It was the submission that the return has not been filed in ITR-2 and the requisite tax recovery certificate (TRC) and the requisite Form 10F has also not been produced relevant to provisions of section 90A(5) of the Act. ITA No.390/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 5 | 5 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the details filed by the assessee on 6.7.2024, which admittedly has not been considered by the ld CIT(A) shows that necessary TRC from the foreign tax authorities nor the requisite form in respect of the claim of credit of tax recovery in the foreign country has been produced before the ld CIT(A). The same is also not before us. This being so, we find no error in the order passed u/s.154 by the Assessing Officer, which is also upheld by the ld CIT(A) 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 17/10/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 17/10/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Shyam Sundar Jena, Dulla Devi Road Kalyani Nagar, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "