Limit of sec 194i if house is co-owned


This query is : Resolved 

15 February 2016 Dear experts,
Our company is paying rent of 5,00,000/- p.a & the rent agreement stipulates 1,80,000/- is to be paid to Mr A ; 1.8L to Mr B; 1.4L to Mr C. Do we need to deduct TDS as per 194 I?

Going with the view given by the Allahabad HC, the case mentioned there was that the house is co-owned, but in my case we dont know whether the house is co-owned. Only the agreement for rent provides the pattern. Does the onus to prove that the house is co-owned is on us or the landlord??

15 February 2016 Yes the onus to prove the house is co-owned is on the landlord. Further, in any case. the amount paid to Mr.A & Mr.B are subject to TDS since the amount is over threshold limit. Only in case of Mr.C is the share of rent below Rs.1.8 lac and hence not liable to TDS.

15 February 2016 If A,B and C are co-owned property then you don't need to deduct TDS as individual co-owner enjoys threshold limit of Rs.1,80,000.

But where Deductor have no proper evidence to prove that property is co-owned by A,B and C deductor is responsible to deduct TDS on total payment made to A,B and C,

So in case you cannot have proper evidence to prove property is owned by A,B and C you need to deduct TDS on total payment made to A,B and C i.e, TDS applicable on Rs.5,00,000 @ 10% as per section 194I

15 February 2016 Respected Suresh Ramaswamy Sir,
Threshold limit has not exceeded to Mr A & Mr B because they are receiving only 1,80,000/- because 194I provides exemption if it is up to 1,80,000/-. Am I correct??

15 February 2016 Respected Ganesh sir,
Is there any case law supporting the view you have opined?

16 February 2016 Where the share of each co-owner in the property is definite and ascertainable, the limit of Rs. 180,000 will be applicable to each co-owner separately.

Reference

1)Clarification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No. 715 dated 08-08-1995, particularly to the question No. 22

2)The few of the cases which can be relied upon in support of the above view are as under:

a] Gora Chand Sen v. CIT (1985) 154 ITR 435 (Cal).

b] Tulsidas Kilachand v. CIT (1987) 63 CTR (Bom) 324.

c] CIT v. Nauseer K. Kanga (1979) 120 ITR 404 (Bom).


You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries


loading


Unanswered Queries



CCI Pro



Answer Query



Company
ARTICLESHIP 04 September 2026
Accounts Executive

Hema Yashwanth & Associates

Chennai

B.Com

View Details
Company
22 September 2026
Account Assistant

Chirag P Shah & Co. Chartered Accountant

Pune

B.Com

View Details
Company
16 September 2026
Internal Audit - Team Lead

Consulting & Beyond

Chennai

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 07 September 2026
Article/ Paid Assistant

Murali and Sumeet Chartered Accountant

Bengaluru

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
20 September 2026
Semi Qualified CA

Navin & Associates

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
Featured 11 September 2026
Audit Executive

RBSM Corporate Advisors Private Limited

Pune

CA

View Details
Company
15 September 2026
Client-site CA associate

Aditya Muley and Co

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
28 August 2026
Assistant Manager

NRS AND ASSOCIATES

Kozhikode

CA Inter

View Details