What is the leading case on Section 197(1) of the Income Tax Act?

Elkem Technology v. Dy. CIT (250 ITR 164) is the decision most relied on for Section 197(1), cited in 9 judgments.

Which cases are most cited on Section 197(1)?

Elkem Technology v. Dy. CIT (250 ITR 164) — 9 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 197(1)?

BharatTax indexes 25 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 197(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 197(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.395

Section 197(1) falls under section 197 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 395 (Certificates) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 395 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 197(1) is Elkem Technology v. Dy. CIT (250 ITR 164), cited in 9 of the 25 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 197(1)

Elkem Technology v. Dy. CIT

250 ITR 164 · 2001 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 197(1)

Franklin Templeton International Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1495/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(6)Section 92D

Rising Retails(P)Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1005/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 197(1)Section 250Section 40a

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. Future First Info. Services Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/195/2022HC Delhi14 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 194C(2)Section 194ISection 197(1)Section 201Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40a

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. Future First Info. Services Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 195 / 2022HC Delhi14 Jul 2022

Section 194C(2)Section 194ISection 197(1)Section 201Section 40Section 40A(2)Section 40a

Rajarambapu Shetkari and Shetmajur Sahhaya Samiti, Sangli vs. Income Tax Officer, Sangli

Appeal is allowed for stastical purposes in above terms

ITA 370/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.370/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 40

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Future First Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3476/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CA & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

Future First Info. Servicees Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 9(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3838/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CA & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

All Rajasthan State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Employees Association, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward - 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 851/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Bhala (CA)For Respondent: Mrs. Chanchal Meena (Addl.CIT)

Section 10(24)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S.Fashion Impex, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Offier-21(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for the AY 2009-10 is allowed and for AYs 2010-

ITA 6145/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Fashion Impex, Income Tax Officer, 205, Ashish Industries Estate, Vs. 21(1)(5), Piramal Gokhale Road (S), Dadar (West) Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400025. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Aabff3486G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Girish Dave & Sashank Dundu, Ars Revenue By : Mr. Bhera Ram, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Dave & Sashank Dundu, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Bhera Ram, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234A

M/S.Fashion Impex, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Offier-21(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal for the AY 2009-10 is allowed and for AYs 2010-

ITA 6144/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Dave & Sashank Dundu, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Bhera Ram, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234A

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Vijay Engineering & Metal Works, Faridabad

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3294/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Ms. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 133ASection 142Section 143Section 40

ACIT Central Circle, Jamshedpur vs. M/S Suraj Solution Pvt Ltd, Jamshedpur

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

ITA 72/RAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

ACIT Central Circle, Jamshedpur vs. M/S Suraj Solutions Pvt Ltd, Jamshdpur

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the

ITA 184/RAN/2017[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Calcutta Mining Sealants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1805/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1805/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Calcutta Mining Sealants Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabcc 4335 N ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 197(1)

Laurel Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 58(3), TDS, Kolkata

ITA 1465/KOL/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2002-03 Laurel Securities Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 313, Todi Chambers, 2, Ward-58(3), Tds 10B, V/S. Middleton Row, 8Th Lal Bazar Street, Kolkata-70001 Floor, Kolkata-700071 [Pan No. Aaacl 4545 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Yash Vardhan Baid, अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri A. Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 23-07-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2002-03 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Kolkata’S Order Dated 15.04.2016, Upholding The Assessing Officer’S Action Treating It To Be An Assessee In Default On Account Of Non Deduction Of Tds On Interest Amount Of ₹1,02,342/- Paid To The Payee M/S Forward Looking Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. Thereby Raising The Demand In Question Of ₹34,965/-, Involving Proceedings U/S 201(1)/201(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. There Does Not Appear To Be Any Dispute Per Se Between The Parties So Far As The Basic Fact Is That Assessee Has Not Deducted Tds Amount On The Impugned Interest Amount Paid To The Company Payee M/S Forward Looking Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., To The Tune Of ₹3,15,374/-. The Assessing Officer Noticed Assessee’S Above Failure In

Section 197(1)Section 201Section 201(1)

A.C.I.T., Circle-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Duncans Tea Ltd, Kolkata

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

ITA 2089/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 2089/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Duncans Tea Ltd. [Pan: Aabcd 0201 A ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

Section 143(3)

M/S Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Reserch Centre Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1107/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1107/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2009-10 M/S Peerless Hospitex Hospital & Research Centre Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-11(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aabcp 7225 L ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. (AR)For Respondent: Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 40

Shri Ashokkumar Devichand Lodha, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 942/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).The Ld.Cit(A) Has Sustained The Impugned Penalty.

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 197(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 40

Ran Vijay Singh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-28, Kolkata

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

ITA 2223/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm I.T.A. No. 2223/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Ran Vijay Singh...............................………………………………….......................................Appellant 2, Hide Road, Kolkata – 700 043 [Pan: Amhps 8770 J] Dcit Cir 28....……………………………………………………...............................................Respondent 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 5Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 016 Appearances By: Shri M.D. Shah, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 15, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 04 , 2018 Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2013 Passed By The Ld. Cit(Appeals) – Xiv, Kolkata For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Learned Ar Submits That The A.O. Made Addition Of Rs. 63,16,063/- For Non Deduction Of Tds By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The Act. The Cit(A) Deleted The Addition To An Extent Of Rs. 43,77,000/- Holding That The Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Is Not Applicable As The Said Payment Paid On Account Of Rent To M/S. Kolkata Port Trust In View Of The Certificate Issued U/S 197(1) Of The Act By The Income Tax Department & Confirmed The Balance Sheet Of Rs. 19,39,066/-. The Learned Ar Relied On The Decision Of Hon’Ble High Court Of Delhi In The Case Of Ansal Land Mark Township

Section 139Section 197(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

Mukesh Rustogi, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 662/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The End Of Year & Tax Has Been Paid By The Recipient. Hence The Disallowance Addition So Made & Confirmed By The Cit (A) Is Being Totally Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts. Hence The Same May Kindly Be Deleted In Full.

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 197(1)Section 234BSection 40