NITESH KUMAR GANESHPRASAD ASATI,DELHI vs. TDS, INCOME TAX OFFICE
What were the facts?
The assessee purchased property and deducted TDS at 1% as per Section 194IA. However, the seller's PAN was inoperative, leading to a demand for higher TDS. The assessee later obtained Form 26A confirming the seller offered the income and paid taxes.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee fulfilled the conditions under the first proviso to Section 201(1) as the deductee had offered the income and discharged the tax liability. Therefore, the assessee cannot be treated as an assessee in default.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee can be held as an assessee in default for short deduction of TDS due to an inoperative seller PAN, when the seller has subsequently regularized their PAN and offered the income for taxation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA [ACCOUNTANT MEMBER]:
The above-captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 22.01.2026, passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A), Panaji (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), arising out of the rectification order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the DCIT, TDS, Ghaziabad for A.Y. 2024-25. 2. The ground of appeals raised by the assessee are as under:
“1. The assessee acted in full compliance with Section 194IA by deducting and depositing TDS at 1% of the sale consideration, using the sellers' valid PAN as declared by the seller at the time of transact
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 194IA
- Jagadish Panchal, Udaipur vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 314/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Kamal Namdev Nimhan, Pune vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), PuneITA 2547/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Ketan Baldev Khanna, Mumbai vs Assesment Unit, PuneITA 2405/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed8 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Nalin Rawat, Punjab vs ITO. Ward 6(1), Chandigarh, PunjabITA 272/CHANDI/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2019-20
- Kuldeep Kumar, South Delhi vs Ward 28(5), Delhi, Income Tax OfficeITA 3448/DEL/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed4 Aug 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Debashis Dutta vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Venky Re Rolling Private Limited vs. State Of Bihar Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Bihar PatnaPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- Sakti Pada Ghosh vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Madhusudan Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax Midnapore Charge And OrsCalcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Fakhruddin Husainibhai @ Fakhruddin Hasainbhai vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026