IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2842/Del/2025, A.Y. 2020-21 Hasbro SA Dy. Commissioner of Rue Emile Boechat 31, Income Tax (International

2800 Delemont, Vs. Tax), Switzerland, Circle-1(1)(1), Switzerland Delhi PAN: AAFCH6585F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Manish, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 14/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.):

1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 01st Feb, 25 of passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -42, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] wherein rectification order dated 15.06.2024 u/s 154 of the Act by ACIT (CPC), Bengaluru was upheld and disallowance of TDS claim of Rs. 21,14,675/- was confirmed.

2. The facts in brief are that the appellant is a foreign company having registered office located in Switzerland. During the A.Y. 2020-21, the appellant has earned income of INR 2,11,46,750/- from which tax of INR 21,14,675 has already been deducted at sources. The appellant has filed the return of income u/s 139(4) of the Act for A.Y. 2020-21 on 31st March, 2021 declaring a total income at Rs. 2,11,46,750/- offered to tax at the rate of 10% as per the Article 12 of India – Switzerland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (‘DTAA’) while claiming credit of Tax Deducted at Source (‘TDS’) of Rs. 21,14,675/- against the tax liability on total income. The return of income has been processed vide the intimation dated 9th December, 2021 issued u/s 143(1) of the Act by ACIT (CPC), Bengaluru (AO). In the said intimation, the total income of the appellant has been assessed at INR 2,11,46,750/- and the credit of TDS amount of Rs. 21,14,675/- has not been granted. As a result, the demand of Rs. 27,07,820 including interest was raised for A.Y. 2020-21.

3. Aggrieved by the said intimation, the appellant had filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act before the AO. The said application was dismissed and credit of TDS amount of Rs. 21,14,675/- has not been granted. The appellant challenged the said order u/s 154 of the Act by the Ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed the appeal vide the impugned order.

4. The only issue raised is that the AO has not given the credit of TDS of Rs. 21,14,675/- despite duly reflected in the Form 26AS of A.Y. 2021-22 (P.B. Page No. 46) deposited on 29.06.2021 and the corresponding income has been duly offered to tax in the return of income filed i.e. A.Y. 2020-21. It was further held that as per Section 199 of the Act read with Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, credit for TDS shall be given for the assessment year for which such income is assessable. The Ld. CIT(A) further observed that on perusal of Form 26AS for A.Y. 2020-21 and 2021-22, it is noticed that amount of royalty of INR 2,11,46,750 has mentioned in return of income, and the corresponding TDS of INR 21,14,675 has been reflected in Form 26AS for the financial year 2020-21 relevant to Assessment Year 2021-22 whereas no data is reflected in in Form 26AS for the F.Y. 2019-20 and A.Y. 2020-21, i.e. neither the amount of royalty has been credited nor the corresponding TDS has been reflected. Hence, it was held that the contention of the appellant was void on merits and the appeal was dismissed.

5. We have heard the ld. AR for the Assessee and Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue. The Ld. AR for the assessee stated that the assessee has moved an application for admitting the additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules 1963 (ITAT rules). The said additional evidence has been annexed as Annexure A, B and C with the application wherein the copy of invoice raised by the assessee, financial statement of Hasbro India Toys Pvt. Ltd. (‘HITPL’) who has deducted th