Case Law Details
1. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the fact that AO has not allowed the TDS credit deducted by the payers, while making the payment to the assessee. The ld. counsel for the assessee has further contended that name of the appellant-assessee was earlier IT&T Technology Services Ltd. (IT&T) with PAN No. AAACI 9340L, but alter the name of the company was changed to iGate Infrastructure Management Services Ltd. with PAN No. AABCI 1844G. Subsequent to change in the name, assessee has been filing its return of income in new name and new PAN, but unfortunately some of the payers have deducted TDS and deposited in the erstwhile name of assessee i.e., IT&T Technology Services Ltd. with old PAN No. The credit of TDS deducted and deposited in the old name and old PAN No. and the credit of the same was not given to the assessee on account of mismatch, though entity is the same.
2. The ld. counsel for the assessee further invited our attention to Circular issued by the CBDT vide Instruction No. 5/2013 dated 8.7.2013, through which it has been clarified that if the assessee approaches the AO with requisite details and particulars in the form of TDS as an evidence against any mismatched amount, the said Assessing Officer will verify whether or not the deductor has made the payment of the TDS in the Government account and if the payment has been made, credit of the same should be given to the assessee.
3. The ld. counsel for the assessee further contended that instead of rejecting the claim of credit to the assessee, the AO should have examined the facts and if it was found that TDS was deducted and credited by the deductor in the Government account, then the credit of the same should have been given to the assessee.
4. The ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of CIT(Appeals) with the submission that deductor can make necessary rectification with the authorities concerned with regard to error in the name of the deductee and its PAN No.
5. Having carefully examined the order of lower authorities in the light of rival submissions, we find that undisputedly there is a mistake committed by the deductor while deducting and depositing the TDS, but it does not mean that deductee should suffer for the act of deductor. When there is mismatch in the TDS accounts, the AO should make necessary verification and if it is found that TDS was deducted and paid in the Government account, credit of the same should be given to the deductee. This aspect was also clarified by the CBDT by issuing Instruction No. 5/13. For the sake of reference, we extract the Instruction as under:-
“3. In view of the order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court (reference: para 50 of the order); it has been decided by the Board that when an assessee approaches the Assessing Officer with requisite details and particulars in the form of TDS certificate as an evidence against any mismatched amount, the said Assessing Officer will verify whether or not the deductor has made payment of the TDS in the Government Account and if the payment has been made, credit of the same should be given to the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer is at liberty to ascertain and verify the true and correct position about the TDS with the relevant AO (TDS). The AO may also, if deemed necessary, issue a notice to the deductor to compel him to file correction statement as per the procedure laid down.”
6. In the light of this Instruction, we set aside the order of CIT (Appeals) and restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh, after making necessary verification and if it is found that the deductor has deducted the TDS and deposited in the Government account, credit of the same should be given to the assessee.
