Income Tax : Learn how TDS on rent is governed under Sections 194-I and 194-IB, including eligibility, deduction rates, thresholds, and complia...
Income Tax : Companies renting residential properties often struggle with choosing between 2% and 10% TDS. The key takeaway is that the correct...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court rules CAM charges are contractual payments under Section 194C, not rent under Section 194I, clarifying TDS obliga...
Income Tax : Understand the income tax implications of upfront lease premiums in BOT leases for lessors and lessees, including taxability, TDS,...
Income Tax : Understand Section 194I for TDS on rent, including applicable rates, thresholds, and clarifications for various rent types. Stay i...
Income Tax : As per the provisions of section 194-I, the tax is to be deducted at source @10% in respect of income by the way of rent for any u...
Income Tax : The dispute concerned deduction of CSR expenditure incurred before Explanation 2 to section 37(1) became applicable. The ITAT held...
Income Tax : The issue was whether compensation paid to flat buyers was capital or revenue expenditure. The Court held it to be revenue expendi...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that year-end expense provisions can attract TDS under the IT Act. The matter was restored for limited verific...
Income Tax : The Court reaffirmed that lease rent paid for use of land qualifies as “rent” under Section 194I. Revenue’s appeals were dis...
Income Tax : Unexplained cash deposits and rent discrepancies led to rejection of books under section 145(3). However, the Tribunal held that e...
Income Tax : A dispute arose on applicability of the provisions of section 194-I of the Act, on payment of Passenger Service Fees (PSF) by an A...
Income Tax : The issue of whether or not TDS under section 194-I of the Act is applicable on 'lump sum lease premium' or 'one-time upfront leas...
Income Tax : Central Government hereby notifies that no deduction of tax shall be made from payments of the nature specified in section 193 or ...
Income Tax : Circular No. F. No.275/73/2007-IT(B) Service Tax component to be considered for deducting tax on any sum paid as professional and...
In the case of ACIT vs. OBC, Mumbai Bench of ITAT observed that the amount paid by the assessee bank (the lessee) to City Industrial Development Corporation (MMRDA) (Lessor) was in the nature of rent as defined u/s 194 I of the Act or not, which held yes by CIT (A).
Wheeling Charges, Open Access Charges or Transmission Charges by whatever name it may be called, Income Tax Authorities have tried to cover it under TDS obligations whether as technical services u/s 194J, rent u/s 194I or as transport services u/s 194C.
In case of Kottinatu Transporters vs. CIT, The Hon’ble Kerala HC by disposing off write petition held that the tax deduction under a heading by payer, it cannot be determinative of character of income of payee.
The charges such as Landing Charges, Lighting Charges, Approach and Aerodrome Control Charges, Aircraft Parking Charges, Aerobridge Charges, Hangar Charges, Passenger Service Charges, Cargo Charges etc.
Allahabad HC ruling in ACIT (TDS) Vs. Lotus Valley Education Society clarifies TDS on School Bus Fees under Section 194C, not 194I. Full text available for download.
It is clarified that the service tax component comprised in the amount payable to a resident is indicated separately, tax shall be deducted at source under Chapter XVJI-B of the Act on the amount paid/payable without including such service tax component.
A careful consideration of the assessment order would reveal that AO while holding that assessee is liable for deduction of tax at source under the provisions of sec. 1941 of the Act has mainly rested his case on the ground that is the rent as defined in explanation u/s 1941 and the assessee has paid rent in respect of buses utilized by him being in the nature of plant.
The entire grievance revolves around the premium paid by the assessee to M/s. MMRDA Ltd. for the leasehold rights acquired by the assessee through the lease deed dt. 22nd November, 2004. It is the say of the Revenue that this lease premium was liable for deduction of tax at source failing
The revenue have not placed any material suggesting that the assessee had any interest either as a lessee or sub-lessee or a tenant in any of the aforesaid 13 premises. The fact that the assessee was allowed use of premises by IISPL in terms of agreement dated 1-12-2008, cannot lead to the conclusion that the assessee had any interest as a lessee, sub-lessee or tenant over the various premises. The right to use any land or building necessarily implies that the assessee must have some interest in the immovable property as a tenant.
CIT(Appeals) and the ITAT had the benefit of examining the entire documentary evidence which consisted of the various lease deeds and the c & f agents agreements. The conclusions drawn by these authorities on the basis of such scrutiny are concurrent. Even otherwise, if the revenue was of the opinion that any consideration paid to the c & f agent comprised of some elements such as rent, such a conclusion ought to have been supported by facts.
