Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 549 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194C - Addition u/s 201/201(1A) - TDS not deducted from the payments made to contractors under various schemes - payments made to contractors as below the taxable limits - HELD THAT:- We find from the records submitted by the assessee and the payments made to contractors are below the taxable limits and there is no requirement of PAN and consequently, no deduction of tax is envisaged u/s 194C. The proviso clearly states that nothing contained in subsection (5A)and (5B) shall be applied to a person whose total income is not chargeable to income tax and who does not obtain PAN under any provision of the Act. The very intent of section 201(1A) makes it conditional for every person who wish to have a transaction invariably to have PAN, is contrary to provisions of 139(5A) which was introduced by the legislature. The persons whose income is below the taxable limits need not have PAN, nor they need not furnish any income declaration return is not disputed. We also note that in terms of section 139A(5A) of the Act, every person receiving any sum or income or amount from which tax has been deducted under the provisions of Chapter XVIIB, shall intimate his permanent account number to the person responsible for deducting such tax under that Chapter. However the second Proviso exempts certain categories of persons from the applicability of section 139(5A) & 139(5B). We also find from the records that the assessee has segregated the contractual payments more than ₹ 5,00,000/- and less than ₹ 5,00,000/- and submitted a statement before us. CIT(A), in his findings also has observed that where the receipts are more than ₹ 5,00,000/-, the contractors have submitted their returns disclosing the receipts and paid the taxes on the same and hence, it cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee. We also find from the RTI application filed by the assessee that the judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Smt.A.Kowsalya Bai [2012 (6) TMI 451 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has not been challenged before higher forum. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and no interference is required. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
|