TDS in advance
This query is : Resolved
04 July 2024
My property is valued at more than 50 lakhs, and I am paying the builder in installments with a loan. The builder requires me to complete the 26QB form and make an advance TDS deduction on future installments, along with providing Form 19B. We are 2 buyers Can you advise me on how to proceed and guide me through the process of filling out the 26QB form for TDS?
04 July 2024
Refer:: 1.https://tax2win.in/guide/form-26qb
2. https://eztax.in/tds/tds-on-sale-form-26qb-guide
2. https://eztax.in/tds/tds-on-sale-form-26qb-guide
04 July 2024
what option i should select instalments or lumpsum??
04 July 2024
As you are paying it in installment, so consider it in installment.
If you wish to deduct total TDS in one go, you can go for Lumpsum, provided builder agrees.
If you wish to deduct total TDS in one go, you can go for Lumpsum, provided builder agrees.
04 July 2024
Property value is 52 lakhs and we are 2 buyers. Do I need to file 2 forms (26QB) for 2 buyers? What value should I put in Total Value of Consideration (Property Value)? What value should be put in Amount paid/credited currently (B)? What value should be put in Total stamp duty value of the property (C)?
04 July 2024
Property value is 52 lakhs and we are 2 buyers. Do I need to file 2 forms (26QB) for 2 buyers? What value should I put in Total Value of Consideration (Property Value)? What value should be put in Amount paid/credited currently (B)? What value should be put in Total stamp duty value of the property (C)?
04 July 2024
1. Yes. Two forms
2. If paid in lumpsum then 26 lakhs each
3. Amount paid would be same.
4. Stamp duty value is to be ascertain from Sub registrar office. See if builder has it.
2. If paid in lumpsum then 26 lakhs each
3. Amount paid would be same.
4. Stamp duty value is to be ascertain from Sub registrar office. See if builder has it.
06 July 2024
The Jodhpur bench of ITAT in Reetu Devi Nanecha, Bhilwara vs Ito Tds, Bhilwara in |ITA No. 118/Jodh/2021 has held that when the share of each joint buyer is less than Rs. 50 lacs then the joint purchasers are not required to make TDS u/s 184IA even if the total value of the property exceeds Rs.50 lacs.
The relevant part of the judgment is as follows:
Para 2.4 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials placed on record. We notice that the assessee is an individual and as per facts of the case narrated before us and not disputed by the revenue authority, find that the assessee alongwith 3 other persons purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.1.20 crores on 03-09-2014. The assessee paid 1/4th share of sale consideration i.e. Rs. 31.50 lacs. The AO treated the assessee in default applying the provisions of section 1941A of the Act by considering the purchase cost of Rs.1.26 crores. We notice that the provisions of Section 1941A of the Act are applicable where consideration for transfer of an immovable property is more than Rs.50 lacs. Since in the instant case, the consideration paid by the assessee is Rs.31.50 lacs, therefore, the provisions of Section 1941A of the Act cannot be invoked. Thus, we fail to find any merit in the ITA NO. 118/JODH/2021 SMT. RITU DEVI NANECHA VS ITO, TDS, BHILWARA findings of the ld CIT(A) and the same is set aside and the demand raised by the AO u/s 201(1) for non-deduction of Tax Rs.31,500/- and interest levied u/s 201(1A) at Rs.16,380/- is deleted. The effective issued in Ground No 1 as raised by the assessee is allowed.
The relevant part of the judgment is as follows:
Para 2.4 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials placed on record. We notice that the assessee is an individual and as per facts of the case narrated before us and not disputed by the revenue authority, find that the assessee alongwith 3 other persons purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.1.20 crores on 03-09-2014. The assessee paid 1/4th share of sale consideration i.e. Rs. 31.50 lacs. The AO treated the assessee in default applying the provisions of section 1941A of the Act by considering the purchase cost of Rs.1.26 crores. We notice that the provisions of Section 1941A of the Act are applicable where consideration for transfer of an immovable property is more than Rs.50 lacs. Since in the instant case, the consideration paid by the assessee is Rs.31.50 lacs, therefore, the provisions of Section 1941A of the Act cannot be invoked. Thus, we fail to find any merit in the ITA NO. 118/JODH/2021 SMT. RITU DEVI NANECHA VS ITO, TDS, BHILWARA findings of the ld CIT(A) and the same is set aside and the demand raised by the AO u/s 201(1) for non-deduction of Tax Rs.31,500/- and interest levied u/s 201(1A) at Rs.16,380/- is deleted. The effective issued in Ground No 1 as raised by the assessee is allowed.
28 August 2024
Good luck.
29 August 2024
The Finance Act (No.2) 2024 has now brought in amendments and made it mandatory to deduct income tax in case of joint buyers also when the Stamp Value or consideration (whichever is higher) exceeds Rs.50 lacs.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Manual Rectification through AO
- IT Return filed defective u/s 139 (9)
- Defective Return - Tds on advance
- Fixed Deposit Claim Relinquishment by the Nominee
- Income Type for interest from government bonds
- TCS ON SOFTWARE SALES
- Not a CA , can we prepare balance sheet
- What is meaning of merging of expenses or income in accounts
- Income Tax Return of LLP Partners
- Clubbing minor income
- Gstr 9 2023-24
- GSTR-9 HSN Summary and Credit Note without item
- Interchangeable words in accounts
- Adjusted profit/Loss in the case of LLP and Pvt. Ltd.company
- How to adjusted advances given or receipt
- Foreign vendor without PAN unable to to register due to non receipt of OTP on foreign number ?
- 133(6) DIN INVALID format error - ->WHERE TO REPLY 133(6) notice?
- Query for dubts
- GST RCM not shown in GSTR-3B
- Bill from Dispatched from issue.
Trending Online Classes
-
Landmark Judgments: Important Provisions of the EPF & ESI Act interpreted by the Honorable Supreme Court of India
Mr.Balamurugan Ranganathan15 November 2024
CAclubindia
