IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member ITA No: 1947/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years: 2020-21 Rohini Gautambhai Shah The ITO, C/o. Gautam Shah & Ward-1(3)(1), Associates, Vs Ahmedabad Suflam Flats, B/h. Dena Bank, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-380009 PAN: AAVPM9252B (Respondent)

(Appellant)

Assessee Represented: Ms. Kinjal Shah, C.A.

Revenue Represented: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr.D.R.

Date of hearing : 10-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 12-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 18-09-2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax/JCIT (Appeals)-4, Mumbai arising out of the rectification order passed under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21.

2. Brief facts of the case is that the assesse is a super senior citizen filed her Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2020-21 on 19-10- 2020 declaring total income of Rs.30,26,560/- which is inclusive of property income, short term and long term capital loss, Income from other sources, Professional Consultation fees of her husband late Gautam B. Shah. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) and refund of Rs.9050/- was issued to the assessee. The assessee claimed that she has offered her deceased husband’s income from profession of Rs. 11,63,635/- and also claimed TDS credit of Rs.1,16,365/- which was not granted to the assessee. Hence a rectification petition was filed by the assessee. CPC disposed the rectification petition stating that there is no mistake and no amount due to the assessee. Further it was informed that the TDS credit of Rs.1,16,365/- stands in the name of her late husband PAN cannot be granted to the assessee.

3. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before Addl.CIT(A) who also dismissed the appeal by observing as follows:

“5.4 I have carefully gone through the facts of the case, grounds of appeals and reply filed by the appellant. From the facts of the case it is seen that the appellant had claimed TDS credit of Rs. 1,30,313/- in the ROl but the CPC had granted TDS credit of 13,948/- both in the order passed u/s.

143(1) and 154 of the Act resulting into short TDS credit of Rs.1,16,365/-.

5.5 In this context on going through the reply filed by the appellant and on verification of Form 26AS filed by the appellant it is seen that this amount of Rs.1,16,365/- pertains to the PAN of Mr. Gautam Budhabhai Shah, husband of the appellant. In this regard the appellant submitted that her husband was expired and she has shown his income of Rs. 11,63,632/- in her statement of income and claimed TDS credit of Rs,1,16,365/-. This amount pertains to Late Mr. Gautam Budhabhai Shah.

5.6 After considering these facts of the case it is observed that the appellant had not filed the Return of Income in the capacity of Legal Heir of her husband Late Mr. Gautam Budhabhai Shah, hence the appellant is not eligible for this TDS credit. In my considered opinion the CPC is right in not granting the TDS credit as it not pertains to the appellant's PAN and pertains to the another PAN i.e. her Late husband. The appellant has to claim this TDS credit in the case of Return of Income filed in the capacity of L/h. of Late. Mr. Gautam Budhabhai Shah and not in her own Return of Income. In view of the above Ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the appellant are hereby dismissed.”

4. Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assesse is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:

1. The CIT(A) has erred in not granting credit for TDS of Rs.10,464/-and Rs.1,05,901/- aggregating to Rs.1,16,365/- under the contention that the TDS is deducted under the PAN of Appellant's late husband Shri Gautam B. Shah.

It is submitted that since the Appellant has already included income of Rs.1,04,628/- and Rs. 10,59,007/- being income received a