<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Payments under agreement transferring leasehold development rights held taxable under s.194IC; TDS and s.201(1)/(1A) liability affirmed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93286</link>
    <description>ITAT affirmed that the narrower construction urged by the assessee is untenable and that payments made under a specified agreement involving transfer of leasehold development rights fall within the ambit of s.194IC, thereby attracting TDS and consequential liability under s.201(1)/(1A). The Tribunal rejected the contention that the transferor was outside the definition of &quot;specified agreement&quot; and held the beneficial intent of sub-s.5A favours treating such transfers as taxable. The Tribunal found no evidence that the transferor had offered the impugned receipts to tax and remitted the matter to the AO to verify whether the transferor declared the payments in AY 2024-25; appeal otherwise dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2025 08:54:01 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2025 08:54:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858011" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Payments under agreement transferring leasehold development rights held taxable under s.194IC; TDS and s.201(1)/(1A) liability affirmed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93286</link>
      <description>ITAT affirmed that the narrower construction urged by the assessee is untenable and that payments made under a specified agreement involving transfer of leasehold development rights fall within the ambit of s.194IC, thereby attracting TDS and consequential liability under s.201(1)/(1A). The Tribunal rejected the contention that the transferor was outside the definition of &quot;specified agreement&quot; and held the beneficial intent of sub-s.5A favours treating such transfers as taxable. The Tribunal found no evidence that the transferor had offered the impugned receipts to tax and remitted the matter to the AO to verify whether the transferor declared the payments in AY 2024-25; appeal otherwise dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2025 08:54:01 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>