SHAZIA KHAN,SITAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LAKHIMPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that TDS under Section 194J is not binding on statutory authorities and they must independently examine the nature of receipts. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed presumptive taxation under Section 44AD for referral and facilitation services. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) treated the income as professional income under Section 44ADA, solely based on TDS under Section 194J.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's referral and facilitation services qualify for presumptive taxation under Section 44AD, and if TDS under Section 194J is determinative of professional income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.396/LKW/2026 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2024-25 against impugned appellate order dated 18.03.2026 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1087537958(1) of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
“1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of 29,14,716 by holding that the provisions of section 44ADA are applicable to the appellant.
That the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant is engaged in referral and facilitation services for financial products and not in any profession specified under section 44AA(1) of the Income-tax Act.
That the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the services
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 44AD
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Rangoli Hotel, Mehsana vs DCIT, Circle, Gandhinagar, GandhiangarITA 2286/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Sonu Jain, Agra vs ITO WD(1)(1)(2), AgraITA 671/AGR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Sarvjeet Singh Through Legal Heir Manjit… vs ITO Ward 1(1), AlwarITA 355/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026