Case Law Details
Tardevi Jyoti Kumar Bubna Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
This appeal in ITA No.711/Mum/2022 for A.Y.2015-16 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in appeal No.CIT(A), Mumbai-29/10770/2016-17 dated 16/03/2021 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 12/12/2016 by the ld. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (CPC) (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).
2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in not directing the DCIT, CPC, Bangalore to give credit of advance tax paid of Rs.30,000/- by the assessee and TDS credit of Rs.6,083/- claimed by the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is an individual deriving income from partnership firms and income from other sources. The return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16 was filed by the assessee on 08/08/2015 declaring total income of Rs.6,67,780/-. The assessee paid taxes by way of advance tax, TDS and self-assessment tax. This return was duly processed by CPC Bangalore under intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act was passed on 31/01/2016 raising demand of Rs.36,080/-. In the said intimation, credit of advance tax paid of Rs.30,00/- and TDS credit of Rs.6,083/- was not given to the assessee. Against the said intimation, the assessee filed rectification electronically on 05/08/2016 before the CPC, Bangalore. In response, the assessee received rectification order dated 19/08/2016 reiterating the earlier intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. The assessee filed further rectification on 19/11/2016 before the CPC Bangalore and in response, the assessee received rectification order dated 12/12/2016 reiterating the earlier intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. The assessee pointed out that he was allotted two Permanent Account Numbers (PANs) viz., AAJPB6138P and AIKPB8450D. The assessee did file a letter before the ld. AO seeking cancellation of one PAN. The assessee also pointed out that both advance tax payment of Rs.30,000/- and TDS credit of Rs.6,083/- had been duly reflected in Form No.26AS of the assessee and there was absolutely no income that had escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee in this regard. All these contentions were not appreciated by the ld. CIT(A) and appeal was dismissed.
3.1. We find that this matter requires factual verification by the ld. AO and one of the PAN of the assessee should be cancelled by the Income Tax department and credit for advance tax and TDS should be granted to the assessee as per law. Hence, we deem it fit to remand this issue to the file of the ld. AO for denovo adjudication. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
