Section 140 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 140 is CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 272), cited in 45 of the 31 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 140

CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd.
380 ITR 272 · 2016 · High Court
45
citing judgments

When an amalgamating company ceases to exist due to a scheme of arrangement or merger, any subsequent assessment or action under the Income-tax Act initiated against that non-existent entity is void ab initio, as it is not a 'person' under Section 2(31).

Sky Light Hospitality v. ACIT
259 Taxmann 390 · Supreme Court
9
citing judgments
CIT v. Ruby Traders and Exporters Ltd.
134 Taxmann 29 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Ashraf Aziz Kasmani v. ITO
92 Taxmann.com 293 · 2018 · ITAT
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 140

SRI SARVA DHARMA SAMANVAYA TRUST,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS , BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2464/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : N.A/-

For Appellant: Sri Raghunandan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R
Section 12ASection 140

NISHTHA VINCOM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(3), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1160/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S TRISHUL DEVELOPERS, BANGALORE

ITA 764/BANG/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

MR. MADAN LAL GUPTA,BHADRAK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHADRAK WARD, BHADRAK

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 379/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.379/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Madan Lal Gupta Vs Ito, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak Near Charampa College, Tishalpur, Rahanja, Charampa, Bhadrak, 756101 Pan No. : Acxpg 7862 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.R. Panda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assesee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac),Delhi Dated 18/10/2024 Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10541/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. At The Outset, It Is Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 181 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, The Delay Of 181 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 140

BOUTIQUE DE FLEUR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(2), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 446/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 446/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Boutique De Fleur,………………………………..Appellant Lawgical Consultants, 2D, Bentinck Street, Unit No. A, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aajfb1035D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-45(2), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 140Section 142(1)Section 249(2)Section 69A

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 7/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 6/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 5/PAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

MONGIA STEEL LIMITED,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE,, DHANBAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 81/RAN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi19 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaymongia Steel Ltd., A.C.I.T., Burhiadih, Tundi Road, Giridih-815301 Central Circle, Vs. (Jharkhand) Dhanbad. Pan No. Aabcm 4621 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 147Section 148Section 153A

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO , INCOME ATX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4783/MUM/2023[2011-2]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO, INCOME TAX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4782/MUM/2023[AY 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO, INCOME TAX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4781/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO, INCOME TAX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4780/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO, INCOME TAX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4779/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

ZAKIR ABDULKARIM NAIK,MUMBAI vs. AO, INCOME TAX

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4778/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR a/w
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

JAGADESWARI MAHENDRAN,PUTTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), TIRUPATI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as ‘defective’

ITA 727/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 140Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148ASection 69

REKHA RANI GUPTA,BURDWAN (EAST) vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

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

ITA 1059/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1059/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Rekha Rani Gupta, Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Burdwan Hossainpur, Purba Bardhaman Pin-713125 Pan No. : Bxvpg 1588 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 29.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Smt. Madhumita Das, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was The Submission By The Ld. Ar That That The Assessee Had On The Basis Of The Form 26As Filed His Return Of Income. It Was The Submission That In The Form 26As It Was Shown That The Assessee Had Done Certain Contract Work For West Bengal State Electricity Board Burdwan Division. It Was The Submission That, In Fact, The Assessee Had Not Done Any Work. It Was The Submission That The West Bengal State Electricity Board Burdwan Division Had Also Clarified Before The Ao In Response To Notice U/S.133(6) Of The Act That The Assessee Has Not Done Any Work For Them. However, The Ao Added The Total Contract Amount As Shown In The Form 26As As Income

For Appellant: Smt. Madhumita Das, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 140

M/S. ESSEM COMMUNICATIONS (HYD) PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-17(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 236/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: FixedITAT Hyderabad08 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.236/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Essem Vs. Ito Communications (Hyd) Ward 17(2) Private Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabce1524H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: N O N E राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Pvitram Kumar J, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 27/01/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When This Appeal Was Called For Hearing At 10.30Am & Accordingly, The Matter Was Passed Over To Be Taken At The End Of The Board. When

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: : Shri Pvitram Kumar J, Sr.AR
Section 253

MIRA GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 45(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 2635/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2635/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Mira Ghosh,………………………..………..…………Appellant 22/H/113, Raja Manindra Road, Paikpara, Kolkata-700037 [Pan:Avkpg1522G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….……...Respondent Ward-45(2), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: April 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: May 30, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 140Section 142(1)Section 68Section 69A

MARUTHI CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed being not maintainable

ITA 91/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.91/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Maruthi Constructions Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8(3) Pan:Aamfm5200E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: N O N E राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: /04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20/06/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Appeal Was Called For Hearing, Despite The Notices Issued To The Assessee Through Rpad As Well As On The Email Id Given In Form- 36. Further, It Transpires From The Record That This Appeal Is Filed Belatedly & There Is A Delay Of 145 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Also Not Signed & Verified The Memorandum Of The Appeal In Form-36 As Well As Grounds Of Page 1 Of 2

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 253

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

Section 140 of the Income Tax Act — Case Laws | BharatTax