Haft Propbuild P. Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 102 ITR 399 (Delhi) (Trib)

S. 143(1)(a) : Assessment-Intimation-Adjustment to the total income returned for the AY. 2017-18-Assessing Officer of CPC made an adjustment denying the credit for the TDS even though appearing in Form 26AS-No notice was issued to the assessee before making such adjustment. The CIT (Appeals) confirmed the Assessing Officer’s action for not granting TDS credit merely on the ground that the corresponding income has not been shown by the appellant in the return of income.[Form. 26AS]

Since the CIT (Appeals), without application of mind, confirmed the order of CPC by ignoring the mandate of law contained in Section 143(1)(a) that before making such adjustment, the notice shall be served upon the assessee, there is no jurisdiction with the CPC and consequently the adjustment done by the CPC is not sustainable in law. Even on merits also, there is no jurisdiction available with the AO, or CPC to make such adjustments. CIT v. Relcom (2015) 62 taxmann.com 190 (Delhi) referred to (AY.2017-18)