← All Phrases

“Section 170(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 170Section 170(1)8 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 170(1) is CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (366 ITR 170), cited in 1,158 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 170(1)

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.
242 ITR 114 · 2000 · High Court
238
citing judgments

Employee contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund or ESI, are deductible under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act if paid before the due date for filing the return of income, even if paid after the due date specified in the respective welfare fund statute.

State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.
269 ITR 282 · 2004 · High Court
176
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI are deductible if deposited with the authorities before the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective fund's Act.

100/223 Taxman 398/366 ITR 170 (Guj.) 3. CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
61 Taxmann.com 119 · 2015 · High Court
168
citing judgments

An amendment clarifying the disallowance of employee contributions under sections 36(1)(va) and 43B is prospective. Therefore, before such amendment, employee contributions paid before the due date for filing the income tax return are deductible.

Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 323 · 2010 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

Membership rights and business contracts, as 'business or commercial rights of similar nature' to a license or franchise, qualify as intangible assets eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

Spice Infotainment Ltd. v. CIT
247 CTR 500 · 2012 · High Court
114
citing judgments

An assessment framed in the name of a company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation is invalid, even if the amalgamated company participated in the proceedings. Such a defect cannot be cured under section 292B of the Income-tax Act.

Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT
345 ITR 421 · 2012 · High Court
97
citing judgments

Business contracts and commercial rights of similar nature qualify as intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) and are eligible for depreciation. The decision also affirms that goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation.

Jindal Photo Films Ltd. v. DCIT
234 ITR 170 · 1998 · High Court
71
citing judgments

Reopening an assessment is not permissible without fresh tangible material, merely on a change of opinion or a fresh application of mind to the same facts.

Judgments citing Section 170(1)

Sol Entertainment Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 11(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4924/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

ground concerns the disallowance of Rs. 57,76,633/- relating to the current year's loss, made on a proportionate basis by invoking section 170(1) of the Act. The appellant contended that there was no "succession" of business and that section 170(1) was misapplied, since only a change ... prior year losses and not to the loss incurred in the year of shareholding change. These submissions are found to have merit. Section 170(1) deals with cases of business succession, which is clearly not applicable in a case of mere capital restructuring. However, since the AO's calculation

Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Glaxosmithkline Consumer Pvt. Ltd., Nabha

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 121/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 121/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit, M/S Glaxosmithkline Circle 1(1), बनाम Consumer Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh Patiala Road, Vs. Nabha. Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aafcg8415R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate With Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 32(1)

Nabha “SUBMISSIONS Re (I): Slump sale does not fall within the definition of succession as per section 170 of the Act 2. Section 170(1) deals with succession to business by any person otherwise than by way of death as opposed to transfer of assets and liabilities of a business ... will be appreciated, that section 170(1) provides that a person carrying on business and profession has been succeeded therein by another person; that is, to say, that the person carrying on the business or profession has itself been succeeded by the successor. Further, sub-section

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5704/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

appellants/transferee companies who had taken over their business along with all assets, liabilities, profits and losses etc., in view of provisions of section 170(1), Department was required to assess income of appellants after taking into account revised returns filed after amalgamation of companies - Held, yes - Appellants had entered into

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5703/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

appellants/transferee companies who had taken over their business along with all assets, liabilities, profits and losses etc., in view of provisions of section 170(1), Department was required to assess income of appellants after taking into account revised returns filed after amalgamation of companies - Held, yes - Appellants had entered into

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5702/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

appellants/transferee companies who had taken over their business along with all assets, liabilities, profits and losses etc., in view of provisions of section 170(1), Department was required to assess income of appellants after taking into account revised returns filed after amalgamation of companies - Held, yes - Appellants had entered into

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5701/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

appellants/transferee companies who had taken over their business along with all assets, liabilities, profits and losses etc., in view of provisions of section 170(1), Department was required to assess income of appellants after taking into account revised returns filed after amalgamation of companies - Held, yes - Appellants had entered into

Dy CIT Circle- 12(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Archroma India Pvt Ltd., Thane

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 590/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – Circle – 12(1)(1) V. M/S. Archroma India Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 128C, 1St Floor 9Th Floor, D Building Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mbc Park, Ghodbunder Road Mumbai - 400020 Kasawadavali, Thane Mumbai - 400615 Pan: Aaaca8270F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agrawal Department By : Ms. Shailaja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Shailaja Rai
Section 170Section 2(42)Section 2(42)(C)Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)Section 50BSection 5O

proviso deals with the depreciation on transfer of assets in case of succession referred in 47(xiii), 47(viib) and 47(xiv) or section 170(1) or to the amalgamating company or to the demerged company. 18. Section 47(xiii) deals with the case of transfer of a capital asset ... depreciation on assets transferred under slump sale has to be considered from the prescription of this proviso, even without invoking the provision of section 170(1). 25. From the above discussion it is evident that 5th proviso to section 32 is evidently applicable for the computation of depreciation on assets

Pramod Mittal

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

ITA - 67 / 2012HC Delhi11 Oct 2012
For Appellant: “Whether the Tribunal fell into error in upholding the penalty
Section 170Section 170(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 78(2)

assessee to it. On appeal, this Court affirmed that view and also held as follows: “5. It will be appropriate to refer to Section 170(1) of the Act, which reads: - “Section 170. Succession to business otherwise than on death. (1) Where a person carrying on any business or profession ... succession; (b) the successor shall be assessed in respect of the income of the previous year after the date of succession.” 6. Section 170(1) is very lucid and clear. The partnership firm has to be assessed in respect of profit and gains from the business for the period