Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the threshold under section 194-IA is to be applied with reference to the total consideration of the property or with reference to each co-transferee's share, and consequently whether the intimation under section 200A treating the assessee as in default for non-deduction of TDS was sustainable.
Analysis: The assessee's share in the property was below the statutory monetary threshold, though the total sale consideration of the property exceeded the threshold. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that section 194-IA applies to each transferee as an individual person and that the threshold must be tested with reference to the amount attributable to each transferee, not the aggregate value mentioned in a single sale deed. On that construction, the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source on the amount attributable to his share, and the consequential demand raised through the intimation under section 200A could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee. The demand and the order sustaining it were held unsustainable.