##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

“D” BENCH MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT &

SHRI MAKARAND V MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 7988/Mum/2025

A.Y:2018-19

Mrigesh Gaurav Vs. ITO, Ward 42(2)(2)

Flat No. 812-A, Block Mumbai

Knights bridge Apt,

Kundalahalli ITPL, Main

Road, Bengaluru –

560037.

PAN/GIR No. AJFPG6901Q

(Applicant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Shri Balaji V. (Virtually Present)

Revenue by Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 25.02.2026

Date of Pronouncement 05.03.2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER MAKARAND V MAHADEOKAR, AM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order

dated 17.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income

Tax (Appeals), Addl. JCIT (Appeals)-2, Surat [hereinafter

referred to as “CIT(A)”], under section 250 of the Income-tax

Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2018–19. The impugned

order arises out of the intimation issued under section 143(1)

of the Act dated 04.11.2019 by the Centralised Processing

Centre (CPC), Bengaluru.

2

ITA No. 7988/Mum/2025

Mrigesh Gaurav, Mumbai

2. The assessee is an individual deriving income primarily

from salary. For the year under consideration, the assessee

filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.

2,38,160/-. The return was processed by the CPC, Bengaluru

under section 143(1) of the Act on 04.11.2019. In the said

intimation, the CPC granted credit of Tax Deducted at Source

(TDS) of Rs. 1,62,025/- as against TDS of Rs. 24,75,737/-

claimed by the assessee in the return of income and reflected

in Form 26AS, resulting in short grant of TDS credit of Rs.

23,13,712/-.

3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid intimation issued under section

143(1), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).

Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that he was

employed with Shell India Markets Private Limited (SIMPL) and

during the relevant period he was deputed on a short-term

international assignment to the United States of America from

29.05.2017 to 30.11.2018. It was contended that although the

salary was processed through the Indian payroll and reflected

in Form-16 issued by the employer, the assessee was a non-

resident in India during the relevant year in terms of the

provisions of section 6 of the Act and was resident of the

United States for the calendar years 2017 and 2018 under the

domestic tax laws of the USA. The assessee submitted that

salary attributable to services rendered outside India during

the said assignment period was not chargeable to tax in India

in view of the provisions of section 5(2) of the Act and section

9(1)(ii) read with Article 16(1) of the India–USA Double

Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). According to the

3

ITA No. 7988/Mum/2025

Mrigesh Gaurav, Mumbai

assessee, only the portion of salary relatable to services

rendered in India was offered to tax in the return of income.

The assessee furnished the following computation in the return

of income:

i. Salary earned from SIMPL India – Rs. 81,80,208/-

ii. Less: Salary relating to services rendered outside India

– Rs. 76,73,076/-

iii. Net taxable salary – Rs. 5,07,132/-

4. After considering other heads of income and deductions

under Chapter VI-A, the assessee declared total income of Rs.

2,38,160/-.The assessee further submitted that though TDS of

Rs. 24,75,737/- was deducted by the employer and reflected in

Form 26AS, the CPC while processing the return under section

143(1) allowed credit of only Rs. 1,62,025/-, thereby granting

short credit of Rs. 23,13,712/-. The assessee contended that

TDS credit should be granted in full. In support of this

contention, reliance was placed on judicial precedents

including PILCOM v. CIT (Supreme Court) [Civil Appeal No.

5749 of 2012], DCIT v. Escorts Ltd.[15 SOT 368 (Del)], and

Arvind Murjani Brands (P) Ltd. v. ITO [137 ITD 173 (Mum)],

wherein it was held that credit of TDS cannot be denied merely

because the corresponding income is claimed to be exempt or

not chargeable to tax in India.

5. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the

assessee and examining the material pla