Quick Summary
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Mumbai has set aside a Rs 1 crore tax demand raised solely due to a TDS mismatch in Form 26AS, ruling that such denial violates Section 205 of the Income Tax Act, which bars the Revenue from recovering tax once it has been deducted at source. The Tribunal reaffirmed that TDS credit must be allowed based on primary evidence such as payment advices, invoices and bank statements, not merely on entries appearing in Form 26AS. Background of the Case The
Daily Limit Reached
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free News
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
- No Ads
- WhatsApp Community
- Daily E-Newsletter
- Unlimited News Access
- Profile Visitors
- Link Social Profiles
- Featured Job Posts
- Pro Badge
- Expert GST Guidance
- Unlimited Forum Replies
- Download Content in PDF
1 Year PLAN
1999
(Excl. of GST ₹359)
BEST VALUE
2 Years PLAN
3499
(Excl. of GST ₹629)
View all CCI PRO benefits
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience. 011-411-70713
FAQ :
The ITAT Mumbai quashed the Rs 1 crore tax demand, stating it was raised unfairly due to a TDS mismatch in Form 26AS.
The tribunal reaffirmed the protection offered under Section 205 of the Income Tax Act.
Section 205 prevents the tax authorities from demanding tax again from an assessee if it has already been deducted at source.
The ITAT ruled that primary evidence such as payment advices, invoices, and bank statements should be used for TDS credit, not solely Form 26AS entries.
The ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to grant full TDS credit after verifying primary records and delete any consequential interest charges.
No, the ITAT stated that Form 26AS is a facilitative tool and not a statutory requirement, and primary evidence is paramount.
CAclubindia
