How many judgments cite Mukherjee v. Union of India?

27 judgments on BharatTax cite Mukherjee v. Union of India (4 SCC 594), spanning 2019 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Mukherjee v. Union of India come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 144B, Section 147, Section 151A, Section 141, Section 148A.

Mukherjee v. Union of India

4 SCC 594Reported decision1990#4356 most cited

What is Mukherjee v. Union of India authority for?

A direction from the Supreme Court constitutes an interim stay of proceedings, rendering reliance on contrary judgments untenable.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S. N. Mukherjee v. Union of India · interim stay · Supreme Court direction · T.K.S. Builders · reassessment proceedings · section 148 · section 147 · doctrine of merger

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 144B Section 147 Section 151A Section 141 Section 148A Section 136 Section 144B of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of merger section 151a non-speaking order section 151 faceless assessment speaking order reassessment proceedings section 144b assistant commissioner section 15 section 148 notice under section 148

Judgments citing Mukherjee v. Union of India

Sri Ramalingam Radha, Namakkal vs. ACIT, Circl-I, Erode

ITA 2342/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2342/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri Ramalingam Radha, Oa-13, Kumaresapuram, 7Th Street, Rajiv Nagar, Tiruchengode, Namakkal-637 211. [Pan: Accpr 2234 H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement V. The Acit, Circle-1, Erode. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Mr.R. Venkata Raman, Fca : Mr.Krishna Murthy At, Jcit : 22.10.2025 : 27.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 26.06.2025 For Ay 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Dismissing The Appeal, On The Ground That The Assessee Did Not Respond To Three Notices Issued. 2. Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Tax (Appeals) Ought Not To Have Relied On A Few Decisions Rendered Under Other Acts & On A Few Under The Income Tax Act, None Of Which Apply To The Facts Of The Assessee'S Case. :: 2 ::

Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…urt, by necessary implication, constitutes an interim stay and any reliance on T.K.S. Builders (supra), is no longer tenable in law. To buttress this argument, he has relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in S. N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, (1990) 4 SCC 594 and Kunhayammed and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359. 7. Per contra, Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the contention of Mr. Chaudhuri are unmerited inasmuch as this Court has followed a consistent position that insofar as the jurisdiction of Delhi is concerned, both JAO a…

Pichaimani Gunasundari, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Nc-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2333/CHNY/2025[2019-20 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Pichaimani Gunasundari, The Ito, No.65, Saratha Flats, Non-Corporate Ward-22(1), Ganapathi Nagar, Tambaram. 4Th Street, Urapakkam, Kancheepuram-603 210. [Pan: Cqgpg 6518 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 v. Pichaimani Gunasundari, The ITO, No.65, Saratha Flats, Non-Corporate Ward-22(1), Ganapathi Nagar, Tambaram. 4th Street, Urapakkam, Kancheepuram-603 210. [PAN: CQGPG 6518 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.N. Arjunraj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Res…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 5, Pune vs. Shri Subhash Hastimal Lodha, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed

ITA 750/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B. C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 54B

…f law. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of CIT vs. Walchand and Co. P. Ltd. (1967) 65 ITR 381 (SC) held that the practice of recording a decision without reasons in support cannot, but be deprecated. In S. N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India [(1990) 4 SCC 594], the Supreme Court held that irrespective of the fact whether the decision is subject to appeal, revision or judicial review, the recording of reasons by an administrative authority by itself serves a statutory purpose viz., it excludes chances of arbitrariness and ensures a degree of fairness in the process of decision making. In M/s Woolcombers…

Amazon Seller Services Private Limited vs. Competition Commission of India

WA/563/2021HC Karnataka23 Jul 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 4

…rt examined various judgments of this Court in relation to its application to administrative law and held as under: (Shukla &Bros. case, [(2010) 4 SCC 785] pp. 791-92, paras 11 &13-14) "11. The Supreme Court in S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of lndia, [(1990) 4 SCC 594] while referring to the practice adopted and insistence placed by the courts in United States, emphasised the importance of recording of reasons for decisions by the administrative authorities and tribunals. It said 'administrative process will best be vindicated by clarity in its exercise'. To enable the courts to exercise the power of review…

M/S Sree Lakshmi Silks vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal dated 26

ITA/179/2010HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: It In Relation To Cash Credit Entries In The Books Of The Appellant On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case?

Section 143(1)Section 260Section 260A

…sessee had filed the aforesaid documents before the tribunal. However, the tribunal instead of recording the reasons has recorded the conclusions. 8. It is well settled law that Supreme Court in the case of ‘S.N. MUKHERJEE V. UNION OF INDIA’, (1990) 4 SCC 594 has held that the decisions of this Court referred to above indicate that with regard to the requirement to record reasons the approach of this Court is more in line with that of the American courts. An important consideration which has weighed with the court for holding that an 10 administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial fu…

Shikhar Singh Harnwal vs. Manjeet Kaur

WP/7668/2019HC Karnataka18 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe

…dered opinion that it is just and proper to award a sum of 5 Rs.25,000/- towards her maintenance as well as accommodation and Rs.50,000/-.” 7. It is well settled law that Supreme Court in the case of ‘S.N. MUKHERJEE V. UNION OF INDIA’, (1990) 4 SCC 594 has held that the decisions of this Court referred to above indicate that with regard to the requirement to record reasons the approach of this Court is more in line with that of the American courts. An important consideration which has weighed with the court for holding that an administrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions mus…

Smt. Manjeet Kaur vs. Sri. Shikhar Singh Harnwal

WP/13575/2019HC Karnataka18 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe