9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion and thereafter it was distributed among the co-owners - Tribunal rightly held that the case was covered u/s 194-I(a) and not by the provisions of s. 194-I(b) - assessee rightly deducted tax at source at 15 % as per the requirement of the afore-mentioned section - 608 to 613 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 6-8-2006 - M. M. KUMAR and AJAY KUMAR MITTAL JJ. Sanjiv Bansal for the appellant. JUDGME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase covered by the provision of section 194-I(a) and not section 194-I(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" 2. It is undisputed that the assessee had taken on rent the premises at different places and in each case there were two landlords. The rental income received by the co-owners had been duly disclosed in their individual returns for the last several assessment years which has been accepted a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the rent was paid to conglomeration and thereafter it was distributed among the co-owners. It was in these circumstances that the Tribunal held that the case was covered under section 194-I(a) of the Act and not by the provisions of section 194-I(b) of the Act. Therefore, the assessee rightly deducted tax at source at 15 per cent. as per the requirement of the afore-mentioned section. In suppo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
