https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246916 The Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal, ruling that the lease premium paid to MMRDA was a capital expenditure, not rent. Consequently, Section 194I did not apply, and TDS deduction was not required. The Tribunal held that the demands raised by the AO under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) were invalid as the lease premium was not classified as rent. The decision aligned with established legal precedent distinguishing between lease premiums and rent. en-us Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Apr 2014 16:36:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246916 The Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal, ruling that the lease premium paid to MMRDA was a capital expenditure, not rent. Consequently, Section 194I did not apply, and TDS deduction was not required. The Tribunal held that the demands raised by the AO under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) were invalid as the lease premium was not classified as rent. The decision aligned with established legal precedent distinguishing between lease premiums and rent. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246916