Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Reliance Infrastructure Limited (ITAT Chennai)
ITAT Chennai held that strict conditions provided in Rule 37BA should be read in the provisions of Section 199(1) to make it workable in genuine cases where department is sure no double credit is allowed or claimed.
Facts- The assessee has claimed TDS credit of 68 Crores in the revised return of income filed on 27.05.2021. The return was processed u/s 143(1) vide Intimation dated 08.06.2022 wherein credit for TDS of Rs. 40.43 crore was not granted.
The TDS credit of Rs. 40,42,92,666 which has not been granted by the CPC is in respect of the tax deducted by Tata Power Company Ltd. (TPC) on payment made to Adani Electricity Mumbai Ltd. (AEML) having PAN – AADCD0088F. The TDS credit for the same is appearing in Form 26AS of AEML. The TDS credit has been claimed by the assessee in its original as well as revised return of income. The claim of TDS credit in respect of AEML was revised to Rs. 40,42,92,666 in the revised return of income filed on 27.05.2021 from Rs. 40,13,40,000 claimed in the original return of income filed on 06.02.2021. AEML in its return of income filed for AY 2020-21 had not claimed credit for TDS of Rs. 43 crore appearing in their Form 26AS. Instead AEML has transferred the credit of TDS to the PAN of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. (“Rinfra”) i.e. AACCR7446Q in the return of income since the corresponding income does not belong to AEML and has not been accounted and offered to tax in its return of income and which has been offered to tax by Rinfra. Thus, AEML by transferring the credit to the PAN of Rinfra has admitted that the income as well as the corresponding TDS credit belongs to Rinfra.
The CPC while processing the original as well as revised return of income has not granted credit for TDS of Rs.40.43 crore claimed in its return, since the TDS credit did not appear in Form 26AS of the assessee.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
