Which cases are most cited on Section 140?

CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 272) — 45 citing judgments; Sky Light Hospitality v. ACIT (259 Taxmann 390) — 9 citing judgments; CIT v. Ruby Traders and Exporters Ltd. (134 Taxmann 29) — 7 citing judgments; Ashraf Aziz Kasmani v. ITO (92 Taxmann.com 293) — 7 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 140?

BharatTax indexes 100 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 140 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 140 of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 140 of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 272) is the decision most relied on for Section 140, cited in 45 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).

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.265

Section 140 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 265 (Return by whom to be verified) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 265 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 140 is CIT v. Intel Technology India (P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 272), cited in 45 of the 100 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

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

citing judgments

CIT v. Ruby Traders and Exporters Ltd.

134 Taxmann 29 · High Court

citing judgments

Ashraf Aziz Kasmani v. ITO

92 Taxmann.com 293 · 2018 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 140

Shri Manav Kejriwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-49(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1342/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

M/S B.K.Agencies, Kolkata vs. I.T.O, WD -37(3), Kolkata

In the result, both of the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2552/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri Aby T.Varkeyand Shri Waseem Ahmedi.T.A No. 2551 & 2552/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2003-04

Section 140Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S B.K.Agencies, Kolkata vs. I.T.O, WD -37(3), Kolkata

In the result, both of the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2551/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2017AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri Aby T.Varkeyand Shri Waseem Ahmedi.T.A No. 2551 & 2552/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2003-04

Section 140Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Sri Manab Kejriwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-49(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 698/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.698/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Sri Manab Kejriwal, Block-9, Flat Vs. Income Tax Officer, No.5H, 5Th Floor, Space Town Ward-49(2), Kolkata Housing Complex, V.I.P. Road, Kolkata-170052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Awjpk 1519 R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.M.Surana राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S. Srivastava सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/06/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed (A.M.): The Assessee Has Preferred This Appeal Against The Order Vide Memo No. Cit-Xvii/U/S263/2012-13/1154-1157 Dated 26-2-2014, Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Xvii, (Cit For Short) Kolkata, Relating To Assessment Year 2009-2010, On The Following Grounds :- 1. For That The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A) Is Arbitrary, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. For That The Ld. C.I.T Erred In Passing The Order U/ S. 263 When The Assessee Did Not File Any Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration, The Issue Was Not Examined By The Ao , The Assessment Was Completed Which Itself Was Bad In Law & Therefore The Entire Proceedings U/S. 263 Are Also Void-Ab Initio. 3. For That The Ld. C.I.T Erred In Exercising Jurisdiction U/S. 263 When All The Issues Raised In The Show Cause Notice Had Been Considered & Categorically Spelt Out By The Ao In His Order Passed U/S. 144, Duly Examined By Him Since The Assessment Itself Was Taken Up For Scrutiny Only On The Basis Of The Air Information In Respect Of The Impugned Amounts. 4. For That The Ld. Cit Himself Should Have Decided The Issue, Call For The Records & Examined The Same When The Specific Issue Was Taken Up Before The Ld. Cit That The Appellant Did Not File Any Return.

For Appellant: Shri S.M.SuranaFor Respondent: Shri S. Srivastava

Section 139(1)Section 140Section 144Section 263

Commissioner of Income Tax: Delhi -VIII vs. Shri Kapil Dev

ITA/146/2016HC Delhi14 Mar 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 140

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) vs. M/s. Ind-Bharat Power Infra Pvt. Ltd

In the result, appeal is allowed in part

ITTA/458/2015HC Telangana16 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 173

DCIT 22(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Sudhir Vasu Shetty, Mumbai

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

ITA 6967/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1075/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03 M/S. Spectrum Coal & The Acit, Circle 1(3), बनाम/ Power Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly M/S. St-Cli Mumbai-400 020 Coal Washeries Ltd), Mch No. 6-3-1089/1/1, Flat No. 203, Pavani Avenue, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500 082 Andhra Pradesh "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs 9860J .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Salil Kapoor अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Love Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Love Kumar

Section 140

Spectrum Coal and Power Ltd ( Formerly M./S. St-Cli Coal Washeries Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1075/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1075/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03 बनाम/ M/S. Spectrum Coal & The Acit, Circle 1(3), Power Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly M/S. St-Cli Mumbai-400 020 Coal Washeries Ltd), Mch No. 6-3-1089/1/1, Flat No. 203, Pavani Avenue, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500 082 Andhra Pradesh "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs 9860J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Salil Kapoor ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Love Kumar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :21.01.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :29 .01.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N. Prasad, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Preferred Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Mumbai Dated 29.11.2010 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2002-03. 2 2. The First Grievance Of The Assessee In Its Appeal Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Appreciating The Reason Furnished By The Appellant For Signing The Appeal Memo By The Director Are Genuine & Bonafide. He Further Contended That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deciding The Appeal On The Basis Of Technical Objections Raised Rather Than Deciding The Appeal On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Salil KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar

Section 140

Fortune Financial Services (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO TDS WD 1(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3729/MUM/2014[2008-09 (26Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 140Section 201(1)

Rhythm and Hues Studios India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 68/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Viraj MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand

Section 115JSection 140Section 249(1)

Commissioner of Income Tax –II vs. M/S Micron Steels Pvt. Ltd

ITA/19/2014HC Delhi11 Feb 2015

Section 170Section 391

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Rajapushpa Properties

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITTA/244/2013HC Telangana11 Jul 2013

For Appellant: M/s. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate

Section 149Section 166Section 39Section 66

CIT vs. Jrm Steel Pvt Ltd

The appeal stands disposed of with above directions

ITA/638/2012HC Delhi20 Nov 2012

Bench: The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (The Tribunal) On 02.09.2008 Seeking Compensation For The Injuries Suffered, Impleading Mohan Sharma (The Driver Of The Offending Vehicle) & Hari Ram (The Owner Of The Offending Vehicle), As Party Respondents. In The Claim Petition, The Appellant/Insurance Company Was Also Impleaded As Third Respondent, It Admittedly Having Issued An Insurance Policy

Section 173