Case Law Details
Ajit Chandrashekar Dighe Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Introduction: The case of Ajit Chandrashekar Dighe Vs DCIT, heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Mumbai, delves into the crucial aspect of substantiating Form 26AS or Form 16 to claim Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) credit. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the case and its implications.
Detailed Analysis: The crux of the matter revolves around the Assessee’s claim for TDS credit amounting to Rs. 10,45,439/-, deducted by the employer, M/s. Nirmal Lifestyle Ltd., from the Assessee’s salary income. However, this claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer (AO) due to the absence of reflection of TDS in Form No. 26AS.
Despite the Assessee’s contention that TDS was indeed deducted by the employer under section 192 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and even if not deposited in the Government Treasury, the Assessee should be entitled to the TDS credit, the AO upheld the denial of credit. The Assessee further appealed to the Ld. Commissioner, who affirmed the AO’s decision.
The Tribunal’s analysis reveals a critical requirement for the Assessee to substantiate their claim by providing relevant documents such as salary slips or Form No. 16. In the absence of such documentation, the Assessee failed to discharge its primary onus. While citing a precedent where the Assessee could establish its case through relevant documents, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of documentary evidence.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
