Facts of the Case
The assessee filed its return declaring income of
₹17,40,230, and assessment was completed under section 143(3). Subsequently,
the Assessing Officer observed a discrepancy between contractual receipts
reported in the profit and loss account and amounts reflected in Form 16A/TDS
records.
While the assessee had shown contractual receipts of
₹55,05,722, Form 16A indicated receipts of ₹7,54,92,401, leading the Assessing
Officer to infer unreported receipts of ₹1,99,86,679 and initiate reassessment
proceedings under section 148.
The assessee explained that TDS had been deducted not only
on works contracts but also on supply transactions, and that such supply
receipts were already recorded under the “sales” head in the accounts. The
Assessing Officer rejected the explanation and made the addition. The CIT(A)
deleted the addition but upheld the reopening. Both parties appealed before the
Tribunal.
Issues Involved
- Whether
reopening of assessment under section 147 based on discrepancy in TDS data
(Form 16A/26AS) was valid.
- Whether
reassessment initiated following audit information constituted a mere
“change of opinion.”
- Whether
additions for alleged undisclosed receipts were justified when such
receipts were already recorded in books under different heads.
Petitioner’s Arguments (Assessee)
The assessee contended that the reassessment was based
solely on an audit objection without independent application of mind and
therefore amounted to a change of opinion. It was argued that all relevant
details had been examined during the original assessment under section 143(3).
On merits, the assessee submitted that total receipts of
₹9.55 crore had already been disclosed in the profit and loss account,
bifurcated between contract receipts and sales. TDS had been deducted by
certain government departments even on supply transactions, which led to the
mismatch with Form 16A figures. The alleged undisclosed amount was thus already
included in taxable income, making the addition impermissible as a duplication.
Respondent’s Arguments (Revenue)
The Revenue argued that audit information highlighting
factual discrepancies constitutes valid information for reopening. It was
submitted that there was tangible material indicating escapement of income due
to mismatch between reported receipts and TDS records.
On merits, the Revenue contended that the assessee failed to
reconcile certain credits appearing in TDS certificates and that credit for TDS
should be allowed only for the year in which corresponding income is
assessable, in accordance with Rule 37BA.
Court Order / Findings (ITAT Allahabad)
On Validity of Reopening
The Tribunal held that reassessment proceedings were valid.
It observed that the discrepancy between Form 16A figures and the profit and
loss account constituted tangible material giving rise to a belief that income
had escaped assessment.
The Tribunal relied on judicial principles that audit
information pointing out factual errors can form the basis for reopening,
provided the Assessing Officer independently applies his mind. Since there was
no evidence that the issue had been examined in the original assessment,
reopening did not amount to a change of opinion.
On Merits of Addition
On the substantive issue, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s
deletion of the addition. It found that the Assessing Officer had compared Form
16A figures only with contract receipts and ignored sales receipts, despite
evidence that TDS had been deducted on supplies as well.
The Tribunal noted that:
- Total
receipts were already disclosed in the accounts
- TDS
had sometimes been deducted incorrectly on sales transactions
- The
assessee had provided reconciliation details
- Receipts
were from government departments through banking channels
- The
Assessing Officer had not conducted further verification with payers
Important Clarification
The Tribunal clarified that credit for TDS must correspond
to income offered to tax in the relevant assessment year under the mercantile
system. While deleting the addition, it directed that proper reconciliation be
carried out to allow TDS credit only for income taxable in that year, in line
with Rule 37BA.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1771061561_DY.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCIRCLE1ALLAHABADVS.MSDEORAELECTRICWORKSALLAHABAD.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment