Section 194A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.393

Section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 393 (Tax to be deducted at source) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 393 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 194A is CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315), cited in 370 of the 1,500 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 194A

CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.
236 ITR 315 · 1999 · Supreme Court
370
citing judgments

Interest earned during the pre-commencement period of a project, on advances made to contractors or on unutilized borrowed funds, if inextricably linked to the setting up of the plant, constitutes a capital receipt. Such interest is not taxable as income but can be reduced from the capital work-in-progress.

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.
377 ITR 635 · 2015 · High Court
369
citing judgments

The second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, is curative and applies retrospectively from April 1, 2005. Consequently, if the recipient of a payment has filed their return and paid taxes on the amount from which tax was not deducted at source, the payer's expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia).

CIT v. Thana Electricity Supply Ltd.
206 ITR 727 · 1994 · High Court
260
citing judgments

The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India, and decisions of a High Court are binding on subordinate courts and tribunals within its jurisdiction but not on courts or tribunals outside its jurisdiction.

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.

Merilyn Shipping & Transports v. Addl. CIT
136 ITD 23 · 2012 · ITAT
139
citing judgments

Section 40(a)(ia) disallowance applies only to expenses that remain payable at the end of the financial year, not to expenses that have been actually paid during the previous year without deduction of tax at source.

CIT v. Associated Cement Companies Ltd.
172 ITR 257 · 1988 · Supreme Court
126
citing judgments

An expenditure is classified as either capital or revenue; the 'enduring benefit' test is a key criterion for this distinction, and income tax law does not generally recognize deferred revenue expenditure unless specifically provided.

Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. v. CIT
144 ITR 474 · 1983 · High Court
119
citing judgments

The Calcutta High Court held that a lump sum revenue expenditure, which is of a significant amount and provides benefits spread over several years, can be allowed as a deduction proportionately over the period of benefit. This approach prevents distortion of the profits of a single assessment year.

CIT v. Noble and Hewitt (I) P. Ltd.
305 ITR 324 · 2008 · High Court
109
citing judgments

Section 43B of the Income-tax Act does not apply to disallow an amount (such as statutory dues like service tax or GST) if it has not been debited to the Profit & Loss account and no deduction for it has been claimed by the assessee.

CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation
305 ITR 137 · 2008 · High Court
96
citing judgments

When no specific statutory period of limitation exists, proceedings under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, particularly for payments to non-residents, must be initiated within a reasonable period of four years. This limitation also applies to consequential penalty proceedings under Section 271C.

American Express International Banking Corporation v. CIT
258 ITR 601 · 2002 · High Court
90
citing judgments

Interest paid by banks is allowable as a deduction in computing total income. The decision distinguished the Supreme Court's ruling in Vijaya Bank regarding the deductibility of such interest.

Judgments on Section 194A

Munivenkatappa Shivanna, Bangalore vs. ACIT Circle-7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 358/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri. Munivenkatappa Shivanna, Vs. Acit, Prop: Maruthi Manunath Travels, Circle – 7(2)(1), No.208/1, Idasarahalli Kempegowda Bengaluru. Main Road, Dasarahalli Near Aswath Katte, Bengaluru City – 560 027. Pan : Bixps 0619 B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Adam Kajabee, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.09.2017 Of Cit(A)-7, Bengaluru, In Relation To Ay 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Running Vehicles On Hire. The Assessee Paid A Sum Of Rs.5,75,710 As Interest On Loans Borrowed From A Non-Banking Finance Company M/S.Cholmandalam Investments & Finance Co.Ltd. The Assessee Did Not Deduct Tax At Source As Was Required By The Provisions Of Sec.194A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ["The Act"] The Ao Therefore Added A Sum Of Rs.5,75,710 To The Total Income Of The Assessee For Non-Deduction Of Tax At Source By Invoking The Page 2 Of 7 Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act, Which Lays Down That Where Tax Is Deductible On A Payment & Tax Is Not So Deducted, Then The Sum In Respect Of Which Tax Is Not Deducted At Source, If It Is Claimed As Expenditure In Computing Income From Business, The Same Will Not Be Allowed As A Deduction, While Computing The Income From Business. The Ao Accordingly Made The Impugned Disallowance & Addition To The Total Income U/S. 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri. Adam Kajabee, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

Bank of India, Kirkee Branch, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, (TDS) -1, Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 892/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.888/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Shukrawar Peth Vs. Dcit(Tds), Branch Pune 1412, Shewde Lane, Shukrawar Peth, Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.889/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Koregaon Park Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ladkat Plaza, Koregaon Park, Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.890/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Camp Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), 8A Dr. Coyaji Road, Camp Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.891/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Kothrud Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), 133/1, Behde Complex, Kothrud, Pune Pune – 411038 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.892/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Kirkee Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), Ganga Heights, Khadki Bazar, Pune Khadki, Pune – 411003 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

Bank of India, Kothrud Branch, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, TDS (1), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 891/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.888/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Shukrawar Peth Vs. Dcit(Tds), Branch Pune 1412, Shewde Lane, Shukrawar Peth, Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.889/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Koregaon Park Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ladkat Plaza, Koregaon Park, Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.890/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Camp Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), 8A Dr. Coyaji Road, Camp Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.891/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Kothrud Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), 133/1, Behde Complex, Kothrud, Pune Pune – 411038 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.892/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Kirkee Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), Ganga Heights, Khadki Bazar, Pune Khadki, Pune – 411003 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

Bank of India, Camp Branch, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, (TDS), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 890/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.888/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Shukrawar Peth Vs. Dcit(Tds), Branch Pune 1412, Shewde Lane, Shukrawar Peth, Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.889/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Koregaon Park Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), Ladkat Plaza, Koregaon Park, Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.890/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Camp Branch Vs. Dcit(Tds), 8A Dr. Coyaji Road, Camp Pune Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.891/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India –Kothrud Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), 133/1, Behde Complex, Kothrud, Pune Pune – 411038 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.892/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bank Of India – Kirkee Branch Vs. Ito-Tds(1), Ganga Heights, Khadki Bazar, Pune Khadki, Pune – 411003 Pan: Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)