Section 192 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.402

Section 192 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 402 (Interpretation) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 402 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 192 is 254 ITR 121 (Guj) ITO v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (243 ITR 435), cited in 173 of the 853 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 192

254 ITR 121 (Guj) ITO v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd.
243 ITR 435 · 2000 · High Court
173
citing judgments
247 ITR 305 (Guj) CIT v. Nestle India Ltd.
140 ITR 832 · 1983 · High Court
172
citing judgments

An employer is not in default under section 201 if they have made a bona fide estimate of employee income and deducted tax at source based on that estimate.

CIT vs. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd (2008) 299 ITR 0356 (BOMBAY); CIT v. Semiconductor Complex Ltd.
282 ITR 263 · 2006 · High Court
159
citing judgments

An employer making a bona fide estimate of taxable salary income is acting in accordance with established legal precedent.

CIT v. ITI Ltd.
313 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
142
citing judgments

An employer is not statutorily obligated to collect evidence from employees regarding the actual utilization of amounts paid towards leave travel concession or conveyance allowance, unless specific requirements are mandated by law or a CBDT circular.

Science Corp. India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT
163 Taxmann.com 693 · Reported
56
citing judgments

An order dismissing all grounds of appeal based on a single issue, in violation of Section 250(6), is an unlawful adjudication and renders the order irregular, making it a fit case for remand.

Kiran Singh & Ors. v. Chaman Paswan & Ors.
1 SCR 117 · 1955 · Supreme Court
55
citing judgments

A decree or proceeding initiated by an authority without jurisdiction is a nullity, void ab initio, and its invalidity can be raised at any stage, including in collateral proceedings or for the first time on appeal, as a defect of jurisdiction cannot be cured even by consent.

Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v. ITAT
314 ITR 14 · High Court
55
citing judgments

An appellate authority cannot travel beyond the provisions of law when adjudicating matters, as doing so is barred by jurisdiction and renders the action otiose.

DIT v. Abbey Business Services Private Limited
122 Taxmann.com 174 · 2020 · High Court
46
citing judgments

Expenses incurred and reimbursed for seconded employees under a secondment agreement are not liable to tax deduction at source and do not constitute 'fees for technical services'. The secondment agreement itself forms an independent arrangement for securing services.

Sunil v. Motiani v. ITO (International Taxation)
33 Taxmann.com 252 · 2013 · ITAT
39
citing judgments

The applicability of a tax treaty can determine the levy of surcharge on income. When a tax treaty is decided in favour of the assessee, related grounds of appeal concerning surcharge may not require separate adjudication.

1. CIT v. Appollo Hospitals Int Ltd.
375 ITR 49 · 2015 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Retainer doctors engaged by a hospital fall under the purview of Section 194J of the Income Tax Act, requiring TDS, and not Section 192 which applies to salaries.

Judgments on Section 192

Caterpillar India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai

Appeal is dismissed

ITTPA 42/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 42/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Caterpillar India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Income Tax, Taramani Road, Vs. Central Circle- 3(3), Chennai – 600 113. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 717/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S.Caterpillar India Private Tax, Limited, 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Central Circle- 3(3), V. Chennai – 600 034. Taramani Road, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. By Virtual ""थ" की ओर से/Department By : Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 92Ca (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Dated 07.03.2023. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For :-2-: It(Tp) A. No:42 /Chny/2023 & The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 3(3), Chennai. vs. M/S. Caterpillar India Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 717/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 42/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.Caterpillar India Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Income Tax, Taramani Road, Vs. Central Circle- 3(3), Chennai – 600 113. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 717/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S.Caterpillar India Private Tax, Limited, 7Th Floor, International Tech Park, Central Circle- 3(3), V. Chennai – 600 034. Taramani Road, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan:Aabcc-4615-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. By Virtual ""थ" की ओर से/Department By : Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 92Ca (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Dated 07.03.2023. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For :-2-: It(Tp) A. No:42 /Chny/2023 & The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Harish Ramanathan, C.A. by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

State Bank of India Linking Road, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comissioner of Income Tax-TDS2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2886/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2887/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) State Bank Of India Administrative Officer West Mumbai Branch B Wing, Lic Complex, 1St Floor, Jeevan Seva Annex Building, S. V. Road, Santracruz (W.), Mumbai- 400054 V/S. बनाम Acit-Tds 2(2), Mumbai 3Rd Floor Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacs8577K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2886/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) State Bank Of India, Linking Road Branch, Plot No. 533, Patwardhan House, Bandra West, Mumbai-400052 V/S. बनाम Acit-Tds 2(2), Mumbai 3Rd Floor Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacs8577K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By: Shri Ninad Patade राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Leyaqat Ali Afaqui Page 2

For Appellant: Shri Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Afaqui
Section 10(5)Section 192Section 201Section 250

Anjali Sharma, Agra vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(1), Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 77/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 77/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) Ms. Anjali Singhal Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 22, Vaibhav Kunj, Dayalbagh, Ward 2(1)(1), Agra. Vs. Agra. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Culps-2323-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Vide Impugned Order Dated 21-03-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 01-02-2021. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 285 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Selected To Verify The Issue Of Low Income In Comparison To Large Commission Receipt. The Ld. Ao

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 40A(3)

Preeti Agrawal, Vaibhav Kunj Dayal Bagh Agra vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Income Tax Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 151/AGR/2024[ay-2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 151/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) Ms. Preeti Agrawal Pr. Cit- 1, बनाम/ 22, Vaibhav Kunj, Jyoti Road, Agra. Vs. Dayalbagh, Agra. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ahcpa-6085-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra For (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Vide Impugned Order Dated 23-03-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 27-01-2021. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 330 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Selected To Verify The Issue Of Low Income In Comparison To Large Commission Receipt. The Ld. Ao

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 40A(3)