• twitter-icon
Unlimited Tax Return Filing


Bombay HC Rules ‘Transit Rent’ Non-Taxable, No TDS Deduction Required from Developer to Tenant

Bombay HC's Order in Case of Sarfaraz Sharafali Furniturewalla Vs. Afshan Sharfali Ashok Kumar

As per Bombay HC, no tax is to be charged on the transit rent as it is not to be deemed as a revenue receipt. Consequently, no question of tax deduction at source (TDS) is there from the amount leviable via the developer to the tenant. The bench of Justice Rajesh S. Patil has marked that the ordinary meaning of rent would be an amount that the tenant or licensee pays before the landlord.

The Bombay High Court carried that ‘Transit Rent’ is not to be deemed a revenue receipt and is not accountable to be levied to taxed. Consequently, no question of the deduction of TDS from the amount liable to get paid by the developer to the tenant is there.

The bench of Justice Rajesh S. Patil marked that the ordinary meaning of rent is the amount that the tenant or licensee furnishes before the landlord or licensee. In the proceedings, the term used is “transit rent,” which is commonly referred to as a hardship allowance, rehabilitation allowance, or displacement allowance, which is filed via the developer or landlord to the tenant who suffers hardship as of dispossession.

The respondent/developer strived photocopies of the PAN cards of the owners/petitioner to deduct TDS from the amount subjected to get paid as `transit rent.’

The applicant argued that no question of the deduction of TDS from the transit rent is there.

Section 194(I) of the Income Tax Act refers to rent, and in the explanation of the section, the term “rent” is clarified. “Rent” indicates any payment, by whatever name called, under any lease, sub-lease, tenancy, or any other agreement or arrangement for the use of (either separately or together).

No tax is to be imposed on the amounts received by the assessee as hardship compensation, rehabilitation compensation, and for shifting, the court ruled.

Case TitleSarfaraz Sharafali Furniturewalla Vs. Afshan Sharfali Ashok Kumar
Case No.:WRIT PETITION NO.4958 OF 2024
Date02.05.2024
Counsel For Petitioner:Rustom Pardiwala
Counsel For Respondent:Zaid Ansari
Bombay High CourtRead Order

Disclaimer:- "All the information given is from credible and authentic resources and has been published after moderation. Any change in detail or information other than fact must be considered a human error. The blog we write is to provide updated information. You can raise any query on matters related to blog content. Also, note that we don’t provide any type of consultancy so we are sorry for being unable to reply to consultancy queries. Also, we do mention that our replies are solely on a practical basis and we advise you to cross verify with professional authorities for a fact check."

Published by Arpit Kulshrestha
Arpit Kulshrestha seeks higher interests in financial services, taxation, GST, I-T, etc. Writes articles with depth knowledge and is extensive for the same. The resources provide effective articles for the products of SAG infotech which provides taxation and IT software. Writing from observations and researching makes his articles virtuous. View more posts
SAGINFOTECH PRODUCTS

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us on Google News

Google News

Latest Posts

New Offer for Tax Experts

Huge Discount on Tax Software

Upto 20% Off
Tax, ROC/MCA, XBRL, Payroll, Online GST

Limited Offer, Hurry

Best Offer for Tax Professionals

Upto 20% Discount on Tax Software

    Select Product*

    Genius Software