Wp(C)/15926/2005 Of A.muhammed Ashraf v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kannur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY THURSDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2011 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 15926 of 2005(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.MUHAMMED ASHRAF, CIVIL ENGINEER & CONTRACTOR, CHALIL P.O., AROLI, KANNUR. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SMT.E.V.MOLY RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SAHANA AUDITORIUM, MELECHOWWA KANNUR-670 006. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(1), KANNUR. BY SRI.P.K.R.MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. JOSE JOSEPH, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JM WP(C).No. 15926 of 2005 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1:COPY OF STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF INCOME OF THE PETITIONER FOR 2002-03 FURNISHED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER2002-03 FURNISHED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER P2:COPY OF INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SEC. 143(1) OF I.T. ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DT. 17.2.2003ASSESSING OFFICER DT. 17.2.2003 P3:COPY OF APPLICATION DT. NIL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT U/S 143 (1)RESPONDENT U/S 143 (1) P4:COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO.ACQPA 2788C DT.25.8.2003 RECEIVED FROMTHE ASSESSING OFFICERTHE ASSESSING OFFICER P5:COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF REVISION PETITION FILED ON 22.3.2004 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT.1ST RESPONDENT. P6:COPY OF ORDER NO.C. NO.264-3/CIT/:KNR/2004-5 DT. 14.2.2005 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT 1ST RESPONDENT P7:COPY OF LETTER NO. ACQPA 2788C DT. 21.3.2005 RECEIVED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENTRESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL \\TRUE COPY\\ PA TO JUDGE B.P. RAY, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.15926 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8[th] day of December, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner is an assessee before the Income Tax Officer,Ward -I(1), Kannur and his Permanent Account Number isACQPA2788C. For the year ended 31.03.2002, the assesseeestimated his income at Rs.5,24,130/- for the period 01.04.2000to 31.03.2002 and claimed credit for TDS amount ofRs.1,56,655/- effected from the contract receipts. The AssessingOfficer granted credit for Rs.43,674/- and declined to give creditfor the balance Income Tax Deducted at Source, amounting to`1,12,981/- covered by TDS certificates stating that the amountrelates to the current year 2001-02 and TDS deducted for theperiod 01.04.2001 to 31.03.2002 alone will be given credit. Thepetitioner filed a rectification petition before the 2[nd] respondentand the same was rejected by the Assessing Officer stating thatthere is no mistake. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitionerpreferred a revision before the first respondent. The firstrespondent as per Ext.P6 order dated 14.02.2005 rejected therevision filed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act (for short'the Act'). It is the said order which is assailed in this petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner is entitled to get full credit for the Income Tax deducted at source from the contract payments from out ofwhich the income is declared and accepted in the assessmentand the credit has to be given to the petitioner for the amount ofTax Deducted at Source on production of Certificates for TDSfurnished under Section 203 of the Act. 3. I find that the claim of the petitioner is genuine. In my considered view, the Income Tax Officer should have consideredthe rectification petition filed under Section 154 of the Act in itsright perspective and the Income Tax Officer should have givencredit to the petitioner for the amount of Tax Deducted at Sourceon production of the TDS certificate. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner is entitled to get full credit for the Income Tax deducted at source from the contract payments from out ofwhich the income is declared and accepted in the assessmentand the credit has to be given to the petitioner for the amount ofTax Deducted at Source on production of Certificates for TDSfurnished under Section 203 of the Act. 3. I find that the claim of the petitioner is genuine. In my considered view, the Income Tax Officer should have consideredthe rectification petition filed under Section 154 of the Act in itsright perspective and the Income Tax Officer should have givencredit to the petitioner for the amount of Tax Deducted at Sourceon production of the TDS certificate. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Standing Counsel for the Department, I set asideExts.P4 and P6 and direct the petitioner to appear beforerespondent No.2 on or before 16.01.2012 and explain to himunder what circumstances he could not file the TDS certificate.If the petitioner files a reasonable explanation for the delay,respondent No.2 shall pass a reasoned order and accept thesame. Writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE. B.P. RAY, J. ----------------------------------------------------------- O.P.No. 13887 of 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16[th]day of November, 2011. JUDGMENT