https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21421 The court held that the executing court is not the "person responsible for paying" income by way of interest under section 194A of the Income-tax Act, with the responsibility falling on the Land Acquisition Collector. The court emphasized that tax should have been deducted at the time of credit to the payee's account. The petitioners' argument regarding the court's failure to provide an opportunity under the proviso to section 194A was dismissed. The revision petitions were accepted, the trial court's order was set aside, and any deducted amounts were to be refunded to the petitioners in accordance with the law. en-us Mon, 16 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:21:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21421 The court held that the executing court is not the "person responsible for paying" income by way of interest under section 194A of the Income-tax Act, with the responsibility falling on the Land Acquisition Collector. The court emphasized that tax should have been deducted at the time of credit to the payee's account. The petitioners' argument regarding the court's failure to provide an opportunity under the proviso to section 194A was dismissed. The revision petitions were accepted, the trial court's order was set aside, and any deducted amounts were to be refunded to the petitioners in accordance with the law. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 16 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21421