Income Tax

TDS liability on Individual/HUF u/s 194M on payment to contractors / professionals

TDS to be deducted by Individual/HUF u/s 194M on payment exceeding 50 lakhs to contractors and professionals even for personal work w.e.f. 01.09.2019

At present, under Income Tax Act, there is no provision placing a liability on an individual or Hindu undivided family (HUF) to deduct tax at source on any payment made to a resident contractor or professional when it is for personal use.

Further, if the individual or HUF is carrying on business or profession which is not subjected to audit, there is also no obligation to deduct tax at source on such payment to a resident, even if the payment is for the purpose of business or profession.

Section 194M inserted w.e.f. 01.09.2019

To plug this loophole for possible tax evasion, the Union Budget 2019-20 has been proposed to insert a new section 194M in the Act to provide for levy of TDS at the rate of 5% on the sum, or the aggregate of sums, paid or credited in a year on account of contractual work or professional fees by an individual or a Hindu undivided family, not required to deduct tax at source under section 194C and 194J of the Act, if such sum, or aggregate of such sums, exceeds fifty lakh rupees in a year.

However, in order to reduce the compliance burden, it has been proposed that such individuals or HUFs shall be able to deposit the tax deducted using their Permanent Account Number (PAN) and shall not be required to obtain Tax deduction Account Number (TAN).

This amendment will take effect from 1st September, 2019.

Share

Recent Posts

  • Government

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…

22 hours ago
  • Income Tax

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash not owner who came up to own it

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…

3 days ago
  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

1 week ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

1 week ago