What is the leading case on Section 194LA of the Income Tax Act?

Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd. (137 Taxmann.com 178) is the decision most relied on for Section 194LA, cited in 60 judgments. Goodwill arising on amalgamation is entitled to depreciation. This principle is established by multiple High Court decisions.

Which cases are most cited on Section 194LA?

Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd. (137 Taxmann.com 178) — 60 citing judgments; Union of India v. Hari Singh & Ors.\n (408 ITR 1) — 44 citing judgments; 121 ITR 232 (Punj. & Har.), Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. v. CIT (155 ITR 519) — 13 citing judgments; 109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT (121 ITR 232) — 12 citing judgments; Kavita Chandra v. CIT(A) (398 ITR 641) — 10 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 194LA?

BharatTax indexes 44 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 194LA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 194LA of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 194LA is Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd. (137 Taxmann.com 178), cited in 60 of the 44 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 194LA

Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd.

137 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is entitled to depreciation. This principle is established by multiple High Court decisions.

Union of India v. Hari Singh & Ors.\n

408 ITR 1 · 2018 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Interest awarded under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is part of enhanced compensation and cannot be taxed as 'Income from Other Sources' under Section 56(2)(viii). This decision reaffirms the principles laid down in CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF).

121 ITR 232 (Punj. & Har.), Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. v. CIT

155 ITR 519 · 1985 · High Court

citing judgments

Payments made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials are considered expenditure for the purpose of Section 40A(3). An assessee's ignorance of a newly inserted prohibition on cash payments can lead to deletion of disallowances.

109 ITR 1 (AIl), PH. Textiles v. CIT

121 ITR 232 · 1980 · High Court

citing judgments

Payments made for purchasing stock-in-trade or raw materials are considered expenditure for the purpose of Section 40A(3). This view is supported by decisions from multiple High Courts.

Kavita Chandra v. CIT(A)

398 ITR 641 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

When an assessee is unable to link cash withdrawn from a bank to subsequent cash deposits, and the withdrawals were not required for business purposes, such deposits will be considered unexplained income.

Sajowanlal Jaiswal v. CIT

104 ITR 664 · 1976 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Ghanshyam Das (HUF)

224 CTR 522 · 2009 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

121 ITR 229 (Punj. & Har.), Fakri Automobiles v. CIT

165 ITR 253 · 1987 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Hardware Exchange

190 ITR 61 · 1991 · High Court

citing judgments

103 ITR 706 (Ori.), U.P. Hardware Store v. CIT

109 ITR 1 · 1977 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 194LA

Lakhmanbhai Maru, Vadodara vs. ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Vadodara, Aayakar Bhavan, Baroda

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

ITA 1046/AHD/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri R. Govindarajanassessment Year 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Urjit Rawat, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. D.R

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 155Section 155(20)Section 2(14)Section 250

Dharmavir Kumar, Patna vs. Dc/Ac Circle 4, Patna

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

ITA 70/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dharmavir Kumar Dc/Acit, Circle-4, C/O Naseeb Prasad, Income Tax Department, Lok Paithaninathpur,Narayan Chak, Nayak Jai Prakash Bhavan, New Vs. Phulwari. Dak Bunglow Road, Bihar-800002 Patna-800001, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Avzpk4382P Assessee By : Shri Sudeep Sinha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudeep Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. A.H. Chowdhary, DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 48Section 49Section 50CSection 96

Amresh Kumar Calla, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 699/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 143(1)(a)Section 194LSection 250

Dina Nath Yadav, Patna vs. ITO Ward - 4(2), Patna

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 303/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUAMR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 10(37)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 250Section 3ASection 96

Kiran Kandhari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical

ITA 3315/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mahna, Adv. and Shri Mayank Kouts, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 194LSection 39(1)Section 72

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 127/LKW/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Subhash Malguriaआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.125 To 127/Lkw/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 To 2019-20 The Addl. District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition) Joint Organisation, Room No-42, Lucknow, Up-226001 Tan: Lkna07354E . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 126/LKW/2023[2018-19 Qtr-1]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

The Additional District Magistrate Joint Organisation, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Lucknow

Appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 125/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Akshay Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Neil Jain [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 194LSection 201Section 201(1)Section 246A(1)(ha)Section 250

Land Acquisition Officer, Urban Estate vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle

CWP/14794/2016HC Punjab & Haryana09 Aug 2024

Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 28Section 34Section 45(5)(b)Section 56(2)(viii)

Dy.Collector(Rev)North Cum L.A.O, Pondicherry vs. ITO, TDS Ward, Pondicherry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four years are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 448/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 445, 446, 447 & 448/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 The Dy. Collector (Rev) North Income Tax Officer, Cum Land Acquisition Officer, V. Tds Ward, Revenue Complex, Saram, Pondicherry – 605 003. Kamarajar Salai, Pondicherry – 605 013. [Pan: Chedo-6291-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. J. Prabhakar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 201

Dy.Collector(Rev)North Cum L.A.O, Pondicherry vs. ITO, TDS Ward, Pondicherry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four years are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 447/CHNY/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 201

Dy.Collector(Rev)North Cum L.A.O, Pondicherry vs. ITO, TDS Ward, Pondicherry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four years are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 446/CHNY/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 201

Dy.Collector(Rev)North Cum L.A.O, Pondicherry vs. ITO, TDS Ward, Pondicherry

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all four years are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 445/CHNY/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri. J. Prabhakar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 201

Prabir Kr. Pal L/S Indira Pal, PCIT, Kolkata vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 210/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.210/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Prabir Kr. Pal L/R. Indira Pal..............................................................…… …. Appellant C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Seben Brothers”, P.O Buroshibtala, P.S Chinsurah, Dist-Hooghly, W.B - 712105. [Pan: Agqpp1392J] Vs. Pcit, Kolkata-5, Kolkata...................…....................................................….. Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 15, 2023 आदेश / Order मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य "वारा / Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Revisionary Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [In Short Ld. “Pcit”] Dated 04.03.2021. 2. The Registry Has Informed That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 66 Days. The Assessee Has Not Filed Any Application For Condonation Of Delay. On Perusal Of The Impugned Order, We Find That The Same Is Dated 04.03.21. At That Point Of Time, The Country Was Facing Through

Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 263

Thajunnissa Begum, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corporate Ward -10(4), Chennai

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

ITA 196/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 196/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mrs. Thajunnissa Begum, Income Tax Officer, No. 3, Prasanna Vinayagar V. Non Corporate Ward -10(4), Kovil St., Chennai. 235, Poonamalle High Road, Chennai – 600 029. [Pan: Adcpt-2186-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 54

The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. Chief Accounts Officer

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/175/2021HC Karnataka27 Feb 2023

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 194LSection 260

The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. Chief Accounts Officer

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/176/2021HC Karnataka27 Feb 2023

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 194LSection 260

Shri Kanav Khanna, Amritsar vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Amritsar

In the result, the ground no- G of appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 77/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar04 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. R. K. Magow, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rahul Dhawan, CIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 250(6)

M/S Maharishi Construction Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 916/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Circle- 2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Special Land and Acquisition Officer (Metro). Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Special Land & Acquisition Officer (Metro), The Deputy Karnataka Industrial Commissioner Of Areas Development Board, Income-Tax (Tds), 14/3, 2Nd Floor, Circle – 2 (1), Vs. R.P. Bhavan, Nruptunga Bangalore. Road, Bangalore – 560 001. Pan: Aaatk1305J (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 05/Bang/2021 (In Ita No. 8/Bang/2020) Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Special Land Acquisition Officer (Metro), The Deputy Karnataka Industrial Commissioner Of Areas Development Board, Income-Tax (Tds), 14/3, 2Nd Floor, R.P. Circle – 2 (1), Bhavan, Vs. Bangalore. Nruptunga Road, Bangalore – 560 001. Pan: Aaatk1305J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate Shri Muzaffer Hussain, Cit Revenue By : (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2021

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: (DR)

Section 13ASection 194LSection 201(1)Section 29