Which cases are most cited on Section 194Q?

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd. (328 ITR 448) — 35 citing judgments; Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai (5 SCC 590) — 35 citing judgments; Cloth Traders (P) Ltd. v. CIT (3 SCC 538) — 16 citing judgments; Naresh Bhavani Shah (HUF) v. CIT (84 Taxmann.com 53) — 13 citing judgments; Jonnalla Narashimharao and Co. and Ors. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (200 ITR 588) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 194Q?

BharatTax indexes 123 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 194Q of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 194Q of the Income Tax Act

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

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd. (328 ITR 448) is the decision most relied on for Section 194Q, cited in 35 judgments. Deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, such as Section 80-IA, are to be calculated and allowed with reference to the assessee's gross total income, not just business income.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.393

Section 194Q 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 194Q is CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd. (328 ITR 448), cited in 35 of the 123 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 194Q

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd.

328 ITR 448 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

Deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, such as Section 80-IA, are to be calculated and allowed with reference to the assessee's gross total income, not just business income.

Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai

5 SCC 590 · 1999 · Reported

citing judgments

Cloth Traders (P) Ltd. v. CIT

3 SCC 538 · 1986 · Reported

citing judgments

For the purpose of Section 80-M, deductions are to be allowed on gross total income and not on net income. This interpretation was later overruled by the Supreme Court.

Naresh Bhavani Shah (HUF) v. CIT

84 Taxmann.com 53 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) can be given to a person other than the deductee if certain conditions are met, including the filing of a declaration as prescribed by Rule 37BA(2).

Jonnalla Narashimharao and Co. and Ors. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

200 ITR 588 · 1993 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 194Q

Santosh Kumar Bhogi, Visakhapatnam vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 253/VIZ/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Oct 2026AY 2023-24

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 194QSection 206CSection 40

Santosh Kumar Bhogi, Visakhapatnam vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 253/VIZ/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Oct 2026AY 2023-24

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 194QSection 206CSection 40

Champion Omdev Construction Limited, Patna vs. Asst Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 1, Patna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 72/PAT/2026[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250

Champion Omdev Construction Limited, Patna vs. ACIT Circle 1, Patna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 155/PAT/2026[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle1, Patna vs. Champion Omdev Construction Limited, Patliputra, Patna

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 547/PAT/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250

Patson Foods India Pvt Ltd., Na vs. Arivs.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 157/SRT/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2022-23 Patson Foods India Pvt. Principal Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Block No. 888, Vada Road, Room No. 301, 3Rd Floor, Sisodara, Navsari, Gujarat बनाम/ N.H. No. 8, Ganesh Income Tax Office, Palak Arcade, Shantinagar, Vs. Tithal Road, Valsad, Gujarat (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aadcp1586G Assessee By Shri Darshit J Naik, Ca Revenue By Shri J.K. Chandnani, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.09.2026

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 194QSection 263Section 40Section 68

M/S. Smart Eye Security System, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 29/DEL/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: ACBFS3497E

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194QSection 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 40Section 68

Vikrambhai Dhudabhai Achary, Banaskantha, Gujarat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Palanpur, Gujarat

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

ITA 2626/AHD/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha & Shri Sanjay Kumarassessment Year: 2023-24

Section 144Section 194QSection 40a

Abc Construction, Murshidabad vs. I.T.O., Ward - 42(1), Murshidabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 703/KOL/2026[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George Mathan&Shri Gopalan Gurusamy]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 194QSection 250Section 40aSection 69C

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 42(1), Murshidabad vs. Abc Construction, Berhmapore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3070/KOL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan&Shri Gopalan Gurusamy]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 194QSection 250Section 40aSection 69C

Vijay Sharad Badhan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 3, Thane

ITA 1770/MUM/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AthavaleFor Respondent: Assessee by

Section 143(3)Section 194QSection 206CSection 37Section 40Section 68

J B Khokhani and Co, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5176/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2026AY 2022-23

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 194Q

Manoj Kumar Proprietor M/S Manoj Metals, Faridabad vs. ACIT TDS, Faridabad

ITA 1501/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Smt. Renu Jauhriita Nos. 1499 To 1501/Del/2026 (Assessment Year: 2024-25) Manoj Kumar Vs. Ito, Proprietor M/S Manoj Ward 1(3) Metals, Plot No. 118, Fbd, Haryana, 121001 Sector-6, Faridabad – 121001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aempc9144H Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson

Section 154Section 194QSection 206Section 206ASection 234ESection 273B

Manoj Kumar Proprietor M/S Manoj Metals, Faridabad vs. ACIT TDS, Faridabad

ITA 1500/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2026AY 2024-25

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson

Section 154Section 194QSection 206Section 206ASection 234ESection 273B

Manoj Kumar- Proprietor M/S Manoj Metals, Faridabad vs. ACIT TDS, Faridabad

ITA 1499/DEL/2026[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2026AY 2024-25

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson

Section 154Section 194QSection 206Section 206ASection 234ESection 273B

Kesm India LLP, Ananthapur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hindupur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2293/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Aug 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: AAUFK8711G

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 194QSection 40

Horizon Aerospace (India) Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-15, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8997/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2026AY 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv &

Section 194QSection 201Section 250Section 40Section 40a

Rajender Kumar Legha, Sribijay Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Suratgarh

The appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1038/JODH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Jul 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blerajender Kumar Legha Income Tax Officer, New Dhan Mandi, Sri Bijey Suratgarh, District Nagar, District Sriganganagar. Sriganganagar Pan No. Abppl6416P Assessee By Shri Shafi Mohammad Chouhan Advocate (Virtually) Revenue By Shri Vaibhav Agarwal Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 13 / 05 / 2026. Date Of Pronouncement 29 / 07 / 2026. Order Per: Sudhir Pareek, J.M. The Aforetitled Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee/Appellant Against The Order Dated 08.10.2026 U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short Referred As ‘The Act’) Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal, Addl/Jcit (A)-9 Mumbai [For The Sake Of Convenience, Hereinafter Referred To As Cit(A)] By Which Appeal Filed By The Assessee Was Dismissed.

Section 154Section 19Section 194QSection 199

Karmyogi Shankarraoji Patil Ssk Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 3320/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.3320/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24 Karmyogi Shankarraoji Patil Vs. Acit, Circle-7, Ssk Ltd., Pune A/P. Mahatmaphulenagar, Tal. Indapur, Dist, Pune 413 106 Maharashtra Pan : Aaaai 0225N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar

Section 143(3)Section 194QSection 250Section 40

S R Construction Company, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore., Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2669/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S & Shri Keshav Dubeyिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2023-24) S R Construction Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 2732, 4Th Floor, 14 Th Main Road, Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), E Block, Sahakarnagar,, Bengaluru- Bangalore. 560092, Karnataka. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ" Respondent

For Appellant: ABQFS9935H

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194QSection 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)