TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 2003
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../A and R.S. No.176, Block No.216/A, Ampad, Vadodara for a consideration of Rs. 1,61,00,000/- from four co-owners. Accordingly, the assessee had made payment of Rs. 40,25,000/- to each of the four co-owners on 30.01.2018 on which no TDS was made under the provisions of Section 194IA of the Act. Further, the assessee had also purchased another property being land at Sevasi R.S. No.980/1 and 980/2, Block No.885 for which payment of Rs. 22,66,133/- was made on 30.08.2017 to various persons on which no TDS under Section 194IA of the Act was made. In addition, the assessee had made payment of Audit Fee of Rs. 39,000/- on 31.03.2018 to Mukund and Rohit which was liable to TDS @ 10% under Section 194J of the Act but no TDS was made by the assessee. 2.1 On the basis of the above defaults, the TDS AO had initiated proceedings under Section 201(1)/ 201(1A) of the Act for failure to pay tax at source (TDS) under Section 194IA and 194J of the Act. The assessee was treated as "assessee in default" under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act and total tax liability of Rs. 3,19,728/- was worked out as under: - S.No. Name of the concern/individual Nature of payment/section involved Date ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is prayed that the impugned order may please be set-aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and may please be directed to afford proper opportunity of being heard. 3. a) The Ld. CIT (Appeals)/ AddI./JCIT (A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O., in holding that the appellant has failed to deduct TDS on an amount of Rs. 1,61,00,000/- alleged to be payments towards immovable property to which provisions of Sec. 194-IA is attracted disregarding the submissions of the appellant and applicable law. The Ld. CIT(A)/Addl./ JCIT(A) has erred in holding that the appellant has failed to deduct TDS on an amount of Rs. 1,61,00,000/- alleged to be payments towards immovable property to which provisions of Sec. 194-IA is attracted. b) The Ld. CIT (Appeals)/AddI./JCIT (A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in invoking provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) and consequently calculating amount payable u/s. 201(1) of Rs. 1,61,000/- and interest u/s. 201(1A) of Rs. 98,212/- 4. Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal: a) The Ld. CIT (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT (A) has erred in law and facts in co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cable to these transactions. He explained that as per the provisions of Section 194IA of the Act at the relevant point of time, no deduction under Section 194IA of the Act was required to be made where consideration for transfer of an immovable property was less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Bhikhabhai Hirabhai Patel vs. DCIT (155 taxmann.com 87) (Ahd.-Trib.) and in the case of Archanaben Rajendrasingh Deval vs. ITO TDS (173 taxmann.com 722) (Ahd.-Trib.). 6.1 Per contra, Smt. Mamta Singh, Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the consideration for transfer of immovable property has to be taken at the gross value and not the payment made to individual co-owners. She explained that the consideration for the transfer of immovable property in the present case was Rs. 1,61,00,000/- and, therefore, the provision of Section 194IA of the Act was squarely applicable. According to the Ld. Sr. DR, the assessee was required to deduct TDS under Section 194IA of the Act even if payment made to individual co-owners was less than Rs. 50 Lakhs. 6.2 We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The undisputed facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty for a total consideration of Rs. 22,66,133/-. The Ld. AR submitted that since the total payment made in this case was less than Rs. 50 lakhs, provision of Section 194IA of the Act was not applicable at all. 7.1 Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that though the assessee had made payment of Rs. 22,66,133/- in this case, stamp duty value of the property was Rs. 67,98,400/-. Therefore, the assessee was liable to deduct tax under Section 194IA of the Act and accordingly the AO had correctly invoked the provisions of Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act in respect of this transaction. 7.2 We have considered the rival submissions. There is no dispute to the fact that the total consideration paid by the assessee in this case was Rs. 22,66,133/- only. The provision of Section 194IA(2) of the Act was amended w.e.f. 01.04.2022 whereby the stamp duty value of the property was required to be taken into consideration for deduction of TDS. However, no deduction was required to be made under Section 194IA(1) of the Act in the case where the consideration for transfer of immovable property and the stamp duty value of the property, both, was less than Rs. 50 lakhs. Prior to 01.04.2022, ther....