Income Tax : Understand when 1% TDS applies on purchase of immovable property under Section 194-IA. Learn the Rs. 50 lakh threshold, compliance...
Income Tax : Section 194-IA requires buyers of immovable property to deduct TDS at 1% when the sale consideration or stamp duty value is ₹50 ...
Income Tax : The shift replaces multiple filings with a single consolidated form for buyers. The key takeaway is that compliance is now simpler...
Income Tax : Learn how to remove excess 20% TDS demand on property sales under Section 194-IA due to PAN-Aadhaar linking issues, using CBDT Cir...
Income Tax : As per section 194IA of income tax Act, if immovable property, other than agricultural land, is transferred tax (TDS) will be dedu...
Income Tax : From October 2024, TDS under section 194-IA will apply based on total consideration for property sales, not individual payments. U...
Income Tax : It has been observed that deductors are wrongly entering the tax amount deducted on sale of property in 'interest' or 'others' or ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that, apart from the CBDT clarification, the seller had declared the capital gains and discharged taxes. Therefo...
Income Tax : he Tribunal held that accepted on-money receipts from earlier years could partly explain cash deposits made during the demonetisat...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT ruled that where a capital asset was acquired before 01.04.2001, the claim for adopting fair market value as on that d...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT held that income from house property can be assessed only in the hands of an owner or deemed owner under the Income-ta...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that higher TDS under Section 206AA applied where the seller’s PAN was not linked with Aadhaar. However, the Tri...
Income Tax : Central Government hereby specifies that no TDS shall be deducted under section 194-IA of Income Tax Act on any payment made to ...
Income Tax : Every person responsible for deduction of tax under section 194-IB shall furnish the certificate of deduction of tax at source in ...
Income Tax : CBDT has vide notification No. 45/2017 notified that claim for refund of TDS paid can be furnished by the deductor in Form 26B ...
Income Tax : Due date of filing statement for deduction of tax at source (TDS) on Sale of Property u/s 194-IA has been extended to 30 days from...
Income Tax : 26C. Furnishing of evidence of claims by employee for deduction of tax under section 192.- (1) The assessee shall furnish to the p...
ITAT ruled that the amendment requiring aggregation of consideration under Section 194-IA applies only from October 2024. For earlier years, TDS applicability must be determined individually per buyer-seller transaction.
The Tribunal held reopening valid as tangible material showed undisclosed capital gains. It ruled that execution of a registered sale deed triggers tax liability even if consideration is disputed.
The Tribunal ruled that Section 148A(b) requires a minimum of seven days for the assessee to respond. Failure to grant this statutory period renders the notice and subsequent reassessment proceedings illegal.
The Tribunal found that the assessee was not questioned on stamp duty valuation and old payment sources. It remanded the case for fresh assessment with directions to consider explanations afresh.
Tribunal held that TDS liability under section 194-IA cannot arise unless Revenue proves that payment was actually made. Mere third-party statements were found insufficient to treat buyer as an assessee in default.
Additions for alleged on-money payments were disallowed because the evidence relied on by authorities contained errors and lacked authenticity. The decision highlights the need for corroborated, primary evidence in tax proceedings.
The Tribunal held that the ₹2.5 Cr flat investment was fully explained through agreement details and a DHFL housing loan, leaving no basis for an addition. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was remanded for fresh examination since the foundation for concealment no longer survived.
The ruling found no liability to deduct TDS because individual payments to transferors were below the statutory threshold. Consequently, the fee and interest imposed under Section 234E were set aside.
The ITAT Chandigarh ruled that a co-purchaser of property is not liable to deduct TDS under Section 194-IA if their individual share is below ₹50 lakh, even if total consideration exceeds the limit. The Tribunal quashed both AO and CIT(A) orders.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) overturned a Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) order under Section 263. The Tribunal held that the PCIT cannot invoke revisionary powers simply because they desire a deeper investigation, establishing that inadequate enquiry is not equivalent to no enquiry by the Assessing Officer (AO).
