PROPERTY Law X / vs. Tax LAWS

https://accommodationtimes.com/1-tds-on-purchase-of-immovable-property-must-be-deducted/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AccommodationTimes+%28Accommodation+Times%29

The write-up lately published on the website of AT @  has come to be as a source of fresh provocation. Hence this mail.

Looking back through the archives,have been able to locate the mail below. That was sent soon after the new provision came to be given publicity.

If not mistaken, but if remember right offhand, subsequently attention has repeatedly been drawn to the write-ups , since, on display/ articles published,  through which my critical viewpoints have been shared and made available in public domain, for due consideration.

For instance , selectively, -

Section 194 IA (the enactment) of a recent origin

Section 194 IA (the enactment) of a recent origin The newly introduced provision, briefly stated, ma.... Click here to view the full Article Section 194IA of I T Act- A Critique (Supplement) Section 194IA of I T Act- A Critique (Supplement) The enactment suffers from certain lacunae and loo.... Click here to view the full Article RELATED (Above write-ups cited)HERE LAW and ('vs'?) CASE LAW On “FLATS” – A Critical Study - TaxGuru (2013)(76) Kar. L.J. pg. 126-136; And pg. 153-160 Further, to my feedback mails sent to the Department, have had no response; and, to my knowledge, no remedial action has so far been taken.   It is obvious, to my personal regret, that the feedback-input has not been even gone through, and / or the merits or otherwise of the points made have been appreciated. In the hope on hopes of that being done,at least now ; instead of later or never ! Sporadic jottings (to supply more clues): RWA - whoever has thought of and given it that name has done so,  to say the least, has not, quite obviously , given a second thought to it. Be that as it may, that is tantamount to a tacit admission, unwittingly or otherwise, by everyone expected to have concern/vested interests, that they have associated themselves, as 'residents'; not as 'owners'. Even the authorities, -going by what someone revealed (if remember, one Mr. MS Shankar- see his Post on Praja.in), albeit belatedly, have realized  that RWAs (registered wrongly under the Societies Registration Act)  is not a 'legal entity' ; and gone on to add to the effect, that RWAs have no authority to collect any monies for, and undertake the task of, building complex  'maintenance'. SC in re. Podar  case X Suraj case: - Both SC  cases, but the latter should greatly help so long as buyer has a registered sale deed, duly registered after paying stamp duty. Per contra, should there be no such regd. sale deed, at best the buyer could only be treated as a 'deemed owner' (Podar case), so as to be obliged to meet income-tax liability . And by the same token of logic, and an extension of the court's view, be liable for all tax liabilities such deemed ownership entails.       To sum up: Buyer, individually as well as collectively,has been living in perpetual sin , so to say. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to purchase; in order to own; so as to be enabled 'transfer' or inheritance ? Procedure per law - unless followed !  The irresolute problem, or no fault of purchaser (or promoter ?) is that  RCS, though designated in the statute, not been duly empowered , hence not  been acting under the KAOA. Non-entity in the eyes of law - common sense analogy > Bricks mounted on, with no cementing; Or a bunch of untied sticks - RWAs registered under Societies Act have  no locus standi ,  even as per the late thinking of Kar. authority itself. STP- Promoter, till conveyance, continues to be responsible and answerable- if so, be made a necessary party - see Posts @ Praja.in May be, the planned rally, by itself, will  help just to make known there is 'a cry' - but nothing more ! Apprehension is, unlikely to be taken a serious note of , by reason of the fact that the matter of agitation is anyway 'sub-judice' (2014) 226TAXMAN143-151.doc 56kB KEY NOTE:  This is one more instance, in the mega series of  similar instance ; in which,  the inevitability or the necessity for the proposition to address, - that no tax issue , if property- related,  could be rightly  gone into, without  giving due consideration for what the governing property law says That is a vital aspect which  has been / continue to be miserably bypassed /overlooked  at all levels - the Executive, Legislature, and the Judiciary ! The said aspect of  common relevance/significance hold hold to all the 3 issues/grievances, for which the BSA, though late by an yardstick, has now taken the initiative /lead. Pending  EDIT - Invite  the concerned /the eminent professionals in field practice, and or their clientele, to volunteer and mind  to do so, in their own individual and collective interests !