“Section 191(3)”
The decision most relied on for Section 191(3) is State of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Limited (10 SCC 201), cited in 279 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 191(3)
A taxing statute must be interpreted strictly based on what is clearly expressed, without implying anything not stated or importing provisions to supply deficiencies. A person must clearly fall within the ambit of the charging section for tax to be levied.
Additions to income cannot be sustained solely based on "dumb documents" seized during a search if such documents are unsigned, undated, or unverified and do not clearly reveal undisclosed income without corroborative evidence.
The entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of a transaction for income tax purposes; the substance of the transaction, rather than its accounting treatment, governs its taxability and deductibility.
A wet dock of a dockyard is considered 'plant' for the purpose of depreciation.
Where the recipient of income is not liable to pay tax in India, the payer has no obligation to deduct tax at source. Consequently, no disallowance under section 40(a)(i) can be made for failure to deduct such tax.
Orders levying late fee under Section 234E are liable to be set aside if the authorities below have erred in sustaining the levy.
A revised return filed under section 139(5) substitutes the original return, rendering the original return obsolete for assessment purposes. Any claims or entries in the original return cannot be relied upon after being withdrawn or modified in a revised return.
Expenditure on rent, repairs, insurance, and maintenance of guest houses is allowable under Sections 30 and 31 of the Income Tax Act, even if Section 37(4) (or 37(3) as cited in the passages) restricts disallowances for such expenses.