How many judgments cite Siksha v. CIT?

111 judgments on BharatTax cite Siksha v. CIT (194 ITR 548), spanning 2009 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Siksha v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 153A, Section 127, Section 132.

Siksha v. CIT

194 ITR 548High Court1992#960 most cited

What is Siksha v. CIT authority for?

Tribunals should consider questions of law arising from facts on record, even if raised for the first time, if the issue is jurisdictional and requires no further fact-finding.

111

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Siksha v. CIT · 194 ITR 548 · additional ground · jurisdictional issue · question of law · facts on record · NTPC Ltd. v. CIT · tribunal powers · assessment order

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A Section 127 Section 132 Section 133A Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 120(4)(b)section 2(7a)closely held company accumulated profits related party transaction section 120 section 292b section 292 section 260 section 260a assistant director

Judgments citing Siksha v. CIT

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Sons Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4542/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2001-02 Tata Sons Ltd. Acit Cir. 2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Aayakar Bhavan, Roon बनाम/ Mody Street No.555 M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aaact4060A Assessment Year: 2001-02

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,D,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2001-02 Tata Sons Ltd. ACIT CIR. 2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Aayakar bhavan, Roon बनाम/ Mody Street No.555 M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No. AAACT4060A Assessment Year: 2001-02 DCIT CIR. 2(3) Tata Sons Ltd. Aayakar bhavan, Roon बनाम/ Bombay House, 24, No.555 M.K. Rd. Homi Mody Street Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mum…

M/S. Tata Sons Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4497/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2016AY 2001-2002

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Valiant Glass Works P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 38, Mumbai

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

ITA 1612/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sri G. S. Pannu & Sri Sanjay Gargvaliant Glass Works Pvt. Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., C/O. Shankarlal Jain & Income Tax, Associates, 12, Engineer Central Circle-38, Mumbai Building, 265, Princess Street, Mumbai 400 002 Pan:Aaacv 1224 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. M. Doss, (CIT& DR)

Section 132Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 154Section 263Section 28Section 80

…is open to the assessee to set up the question of validity of the assessment in the appeal against the levy of penalty. 8.9. We also derive support from another judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd vs CIT 194 ITR 548 (Bombay) wherein it was held that assessee was entitled to challenge the jurisdiction of the AO to initiate re- assessment proceedings before the CIT(A) in the second round of proceedings, even though he had not raised it in earlier proceedings before the Assessing Officer or in the earlier appeal. 8.10. Thus, on the basis of aforesaid discussio…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. J.B Mangharam Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed but that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1456/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. J.B. Mangharam Foods Acit Cir 4(2), Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai - 400020 D/1, 502 Krishna Kaveri C.H.S, Vs. Yamuna Nagar, Andheri – West, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaacj1657R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Cir 4(2), M/S. J.B. Mangharam Foods Room No.642, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, D/1, 502 Krishna Kaveri C.H.S, Vs. M.K. Road, Yamuna Nagar, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri, Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaacj1657R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dilip S. Damle, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Patnade, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…of the reopening is a legal plea which goes to the route of the case and can be taken at any stage of the proceedings. Reliance in this respect can be placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT” 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 9. Now, coming to the issue of validity of the reopening of the assessment, We have gone through the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “Rallies India Ltd. vs. ACIT” (supra). We find that the reopening of the assessment in that case was done by the AO because of the following grounds: “(i) that the assessee had not…

Westilife Development Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 5, Mumbai

ITA 688/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Ashwani Taneja (Acountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…is open to the assessee to set up the question of validity of the assessment in the appeal against the levy of penalty. 8.9. We also derive support from another judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd vs CIT 194 ITR 548 (Bombay) wherein it was held that assessee was entitled to challenge the jurisdiction of the AO to initiate re-assessment proceedings before the CIT(A) in the second round of proceedings, even though he had not raised it in earlier proceedings before the Assessing Officer or in the earlier appeal. 8.10. Thus, on the basis of aforesaid discussion…

ITO, Meerut vs. M/S. Fazal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., Meerut

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2021/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrii.C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Fazal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., Ward-1(2), 31, Ismail Nagar, Vs. Meerut Meerut Pan:Aaacf7364F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Bharat Bhusan Garg, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rajiv Singhal, Adv

Section 145(3)Section 40Section 40ASection 40A(3)Section 41Section 41(1)Section 44ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI (CIRCUIT BENCH AT MEERUT) BEFORE SHRII.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, Fazal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., Ward-1(2), 31, Ismail Nagar, Vs. Meerut Meerut PAN:AAACF7364F (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing 18/12/2015 Date of pronouncement 15 /03/2016 Assessee by: Sh. Bharat Bhusan Garg, Sr. DR Revenue by: Sh. Rajiv Singhal, Adv Sh. Ramit Kakkar, Adv O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order dated 07.01.2014 passed by ld.CIT (A), Meerut for Assess…

M/S. Lairy Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees stand allowed on legal grounds Nos

ITA 6947/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 153C

…hi HC) reported (i) in 307 ITR 103. CIT vs Pai Vaibhav Hotels (Karnataka HC) in ITA No. (ii) 2638/ 2005 (enclosed as Annexure - B). P.V. Doshi vs CIT (Gujarat HC) reported in 113 ITR 22. (iii) Inventors Industrial Corpn. Ltd. vs CIT (Bom HC) (iv) reported in 194 ITR 548. Hemal Knitting Industries vs ACIT (Chennai TM) (v) reported in 127 ITD 160. That the second argument of learned CIT DR that “AY 2006- 07 and 2007-08 are not beyond the purview of provisions of section 153C of the Act, as the cut - off date has to be reckoned from the date of search and not from the date of handing over of the documents by the AO…

Jazzy Creations P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 4560/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: A Coordinate Bench Of This Tribunal, And, Vide Order Dated 19Th August 2013, The Matter Was Remitted To The File Of The Cit(A) By Observing That, “...We Consider It Appropriate To Restore The Entire Issue Regarding The Tp Adjustment To The File Of The Cit(A) With A Direction To Re-Adjudicate The Same By Taking Into Account The Aforesaid Amendment As Well As Other Grievances On The Assessee On Tp Adjustment By Giving The Assessee A Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing.....” The Assessee Is Not Satisfied By The Stand Taken By The Cit(A) In The Remanded Proceedings As Well. That Is Why The Assessee Is Once Again In Appeal Before Us.

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…ound of proceedings, as a result of the matter having been remanded by the Tribunal earlier, before the Tribunal. On this issue, however, we find guidance of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court. In the case of Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd Vs CIT [(1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom)], speaking through late Hon’ble Justice T D Sugla, one of our former Presidents who later graced Hon’ble High Court as a judge, Hon’ble Bombay High Court has observed as follows: In the case before us, the new ground was raised for the first time not in appeals arising out of the same proceedings. It was taken in collateral proceedings. Re…

The Commissioner of Incomet Tax vs. Khatri Hotels Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 1323 / 2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009

Section 143Section 158

…![](_page_0_Picture_1.jpeg) ## THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:. 15.04.2009 + <u>ITA.No.200/2008</u> $\int_{0}^{\infty}$ $\bigcirc$ $\mathbb{D}$ $\mathbb{U}$ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ....Appellant - versus - PAWAN GUPTA ...Respondent ITA.No.1173/2007 WITH COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - TULIKA MISHRA ...Respondent WITH ITA.No.1034/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - NAREASH KUMAR ARORA ...Respondent ITA.No.916/2008 **WITH** COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - ATUL GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD. ...Respond…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 200 / 2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 158

…THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:. 15.04.2009 + ITA.No.200/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - PAWAN GUPTA ...Respondent WITH ITA.No.1173/2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - TULIKA MISHRA ...Respondent WITH ITA.No.1034/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - NAREASH KUMAR ARORA ...Respondent WITH ITA.No.916/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Appellant - versus - ATUL GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD. ...Respond…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/200/2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 158