Section 191 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 191 is State of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Limited (10 SCC 201), cited in 279 of the 241 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 191

State of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Limited
10 SCC 201 · 2004 · Supreme Court
279
citing judgments

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.

Jagaran Prakashan Ltd. v. DCIT
345 ITR 288 · 2012 · High Court
164
citing judgments

A deductor cannot be treated as an assessee in default for failure to deduct tax at source if the recipient has already paid the income tax directly. The onus is on the deductor to prove that the recipient has paid the tax.

American Express International Banking Corpn v. CIT
125 Taxmann 488 · 2002 · High Court
33
citing judgments

Interest paid for the broken period on purchase of dated government securities and interest received for the broken period on sale of such securities, if treated as trading assets, can be claimed as revenue expenditure under section 28. Income falling under section 18 of the Income Tax Act cannot also fall under section 28.

Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
67 Taxmann.com 259 · 2016 · High Court
24
citing judgments

Tax is deductible at source under Section 194A only on interest that has 'partaken the character of income' in the hands of the recipient.

ACIT v. Dufon Laboratoies
24 Taxmann 199 · Reported
8
citing judgments
Vinsons v. Third ITO (
112 Taxmann 154 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
Executive Engineer, T.L.C. Division, A.P. State Electricity Board v. ITO
20 ITD 318 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
CIT v. Delhi Public School
247 CTR 317 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. ITO (
41 TTJ 28 · ITAT
7
citing judgments
Idea Cellular Ltd. v. ADIT
172 TTJ 540 · 2015 · ITAT
6
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 191

M/S. Ravi Shree Narayan Transport, Bhilai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur

ITA 106/RPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 105 To 107/Rpr/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2009-10 M/S Ravi Shree Narayan Transport Acc Main Gate, Jamul Square, Jamul, Bhilai.(C.G.)Pan : Ashfr7461F . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Tds, Raipur (C.G.) द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. R. Rao Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Appeals Is Challenged Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Turned Out Of Consolidated Order Passed U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds), Raipur [For Short “Ao”], For Three Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2006-07 To 2008-09. Itat-Raipur Page 1 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri S. R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri G. N. Singh
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

M/S. Ravi Shree Narayan Transport, Bhilai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(TDS), Raipur

ITA 105/RPR/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 105 To 107/Rpr/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 To 2009-10 M/S Ravi Shree Narayan Transport Acc Main Gate, Jamul Square, Jamul, Bhilai.(C.G.)Pan : Ashfr7461F . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Tds, Raipur (C.G.) द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. R. Rao Revenue By : Shri G. N. Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 22/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am The Present Bunch Of Appeals Is Challenged Against The Consolidated Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Turned Out Of Consolidated Order Passed U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Act, By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Tds), Raipur [For Short “Ao”], For Three Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2006-07 To 2008-09. Itat-Raipur Page 1 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri S. R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri G. N. Singh
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250

M/S Soul Space Projects Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (TDS), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1084/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2012-13 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs. Dcit (Tds), No.409, 4Th Floor, Dlf Tower-A, Circle-51 (1), Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aajcs7736F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocates; & Shri Shaurya Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2016 Of The Cit(A)-41, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:- “1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding The Assessee In Default U/S 201(1) Of The Act In Respect Of Tds Liability Of Rs.2,01,30,477/-. 2. That On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Appellant Is Liable To Pay Interest Of Rs.48,31,315/- U/S 201(1A) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 On The Aforesaid Tds Liability Of Rs.2,01,30,477/-. 3. The Appellant Reserves Their Right Without Prejudice To Add, Delete, Alter Modify Or Otherwise Present Any Grounds Of Appeal Either Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain &For Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 191Section 194Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)