Which cases are most cited on Section 194C(7)?

Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT (14 ITR 647) — 48 citing judgments; AMD Metplast (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (20 Taxmann.com 647) — 10 citing judgments; Dalal Broacha Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl.CIT (10 ITR (Trib) 357) — 5 citing judgments; Coil Company (P.) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (8 Taxmann.com 225) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 194C(7)?

BharatTax indexes 63 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 194C(7) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 194C(7) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 194C(7) of the Income Tax Act?

Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT (14 ITR 647) is the decision most relied on for Section 194C(7), cited in 48 judgments. A payment of bonus or commission is allowable as a business deduction under Section 36(1)(ii) unless it constitutes a distribution of profits or dividends, thereby distinguishing payments genuinely for services from those merely intended to escape taxation.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.393

Section 194C(7) falls under section 194C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which 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 194C(7) is Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT (14 ITR 647), cited in 48 of the 63 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 194C(7)

Loyal Motor Service Co. Ltd. v. CIT

14 ITR 647 · 1946 · High Court

citing judgments

A payment of bonus or commission is allowable as a business deduction under Section 36(1)(ii) unless it constitutes a distribution of profits or dividends, thereby distinguishing payments genuinely for services from those merely intended to escape taxation.

AMD Metplast (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

20 Taxmann.com 647 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

Commission paid to a Managing Director for services rendered is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, provided it is paid as per the terms of employment and not merely to avoid Dividend Distribution Tax (DDT).

Dalal Broacha Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl.CIT

10 ITR (Trib) 357 · 2011 · ITAT

citing judgments

Coil Company (P.) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

8 Taxmann.com 225 · 2010 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 194C(7)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Davangere vs. M/S Muurugarajendra Oil Industry Pvt Ltd, Chitradurga

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2094/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 194(6)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Bharatpur vs. M/S Arihant Trading Co., Bharatpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1113/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K. C. Gupta (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

M/S Fine Blanking Pvt. Ltd., Hubli vs. JCIT, Hubli

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

ITA 393/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

ITO, Ward - 49(2), Kolkata vs. Soma Rani Ghosh, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1990/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Income Tax Officer, Ward-49(1), Kolkata……......……….........…………..………….…................Appellant Vs. Soma Rani Ghosh………………………………..……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….......Respondent 274, Canal Street Shreebhumi Kolkata – 700 048 [Pan : Afopg 9346 J] Appearances By: Shri I. Banerjee, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 19Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16Th , 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 15, Kolkata (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 02/06/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Is In The Business Of Exporting Goods Under The Name & Style Of M/S. Medimpex. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration On 28/09/2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.14,80,310/-.

Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 250Section 40

Shree Ashoke Prasad, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-49, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 611/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 582/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Acit, Circle-49(1), Kolkata -Vs- Ashoke Prasad. [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 611/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ashoke Prasad -Vs- Dcit, Circle-49, Kolkata [Pan: Afqpp 6505 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(4)Section 201(1)Section 40

ACIT, Circle-49(1), Kolkata vs. Ashoke Prasad, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 582/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(4)Section 201(1)Section 40

DCIT, Circle-15(2), Kolkata vs. M/S L.G.W. Limited, North 24 Parganas

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1786/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Dcit, Circle-15(2), V/S. M/S L.G.W. Ltd., 10, Shantipally, Em Vill. Narayanpur, P.O. Bypass, Aayakar Rajarhat, Gopalpur, 24- Bhawan, Poorva, 6Th Parganas (North), West Floor, R.No.615, Bengal-700136 Kolkata-700 107 [Pan No.Aaacl 4670 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit- अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Dr Shri A.K. Tibrerwal, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 09-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 05-10-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2016, Passed In Case No.47/Cit(A)-5/Cir.14(1)/15-16, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing Assessment Findings Disallowing The Taxpayer’S Commission Payments Made To Foreign Export Agents Amounting To ₹257,60,898/- For Non Deduction Of Tds U/S 40(A)(I) As Follows:- “1. Commission To Foreign Agents - Rs.2,57,60,898/- The Ao Has Added Sum Of Rs.2,57,60,898/- By Holding That The Said Amounts Were Paid To Foreign Agents Without Deduction Of Tds U/S.195. The Addition Has Been Made U/S

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

Hydco Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Chhatral vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2858/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 194(7)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 234CSection 40

Eagle Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2871/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. K. Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 197Section 197ASection 40

ACIT, Circle-32, Kolkata vs. M/S Cisc-Cmat(Jv), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 60/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 60/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Acit, Circle-32, Kolkata -Vs- M/S Cisc-Cmat(Jv) [Pan: Aaaac 4696 B ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Gupta, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 194C(6)Section 40

Shankar Kashinath Kadam, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer, Sangli

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 448/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.448/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Shankar Kashinath Kadam, Hingagaon Road, Kavthemahankal, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Dist. Sangli - 416405 …. Pan: Aumpk8234G Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 2(3), Sangli

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 194C(1)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

Yashwant Dadasaheb Bandigare, Kolhapur vs. Principal Commisisoner of Income-Tax : 2

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1721/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1721/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri M.K. KulkarniFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 263Section 37(1)

I.T.O. Ward -2(2), R, Nagpur vs. Shri Dalbirsingh M. Tuli, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed, "Rer pronounced in the open court 0n O8th March, 2018

ITA 598/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Section 143Section 40ASection 44ASection 4O

ACIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Nathalal Shivlal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2143/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit-17(2) Nathalal Shivlal Ramesh Room No. 134, Bhavan, Gr. Floor, 89, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Nakhodda Street, M.K. Road, Tambakata (Phydhonie), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400003. Pan No. Aaafn0757F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, Dr Assesseeby : Mr. Akash Kumar, Ar Date Of Hearing : 04/12/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Akash Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40Section 44A

Income Tax Offiecer-17(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Sugarchem, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2071/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalincome Tax Officer-17(3)(4) M/S. Sugarchem 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Kshamalaya, 3Rd Floor Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Marine Lines Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aayfs3762P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Purushotttam KumarFor Respondent: Shri Bhpendra Shah

Section 143(3)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

DCIT, Madurai vs. Ontime Transport Company Limited, Rajapalayam

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 91/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.91/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh.D. Prabhu Mukunth Arun KumarFor Respondent: Shri V. Jagadisan, CA

Section 194CSection 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

M/S Sunrise Distributers, Noida vs. DCIT (TDS), Noida

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

ITA 4368/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Joginder Singh, Jm Ita No. 4368/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 M/S Sunrise Distributers, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income (Unit Of Gurdeep Singh Chadha- Tax(Tds), Huf), L-1, Centre State Mall, Noida Sector-18, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadhg8288B Assessee By : Sh. Suvinay Kr. Dash, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.11.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Ex-Parte Order Dated 30.05.2016 By Ld. Cit(A)-I, Noida.

For Appellant: Sh. Suvinay Kr. Dash, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 194C(7)Section 201(1)