Which cases are most cited on Section 159(2)?

Corporation Bank v. Saraswati Abharansala (1 SCC 540) — 10 citing judgments; PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2019) 416 ITR 613 and PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd. (287 Taxmann 566) — 5 citing judgments; Braham Prakash v. ITO (275 ITR 242) — 4 citing judgments; Vipin Walia v. ITO (238 Taxmann 1) — 4 citing judgments; 46/273 Taxman 148/426 ITR 502 (Delhi); Vipin Walia v. ITO (382 ITR 19) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 159(2)?

BharatTax indexes 26 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 159(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 159(2) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 159(2) of the Income Tax Act?

Corporation Bank v. Saraswati Abharansala (1 SCC 540) is the decision most relied on for Section 159(2), cited in 10 judgments. Taxation must be carried out in accordance with law, including provisions for tax collection, rates, and recovery. Excess tax paid, barring unjust enrichment, should be refunded.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.302

Section 159(2) falls under section 159 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 302 (Legal representative) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 302 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 159(2) is Corporation Bank v. Saraswati Abharansala (1 SCC 540), cited in 10 of the 26 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 159(2)

Corporation Bank v. Saraswati Abharansala

1 SCC 540 · 2009 · Reported

citing judgments

Taxation must be carried out in accordance with law, including provisions for tax collection, rates, and recovery. Excess tax paid, barring unjust enrichment, should be refunded.

PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd (2019) 416 ITR 613 and PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors (P) Ltd.

287 Taxmann 566 · 2022 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Braham Prakash v. ITO

275 ITR 242 · 2005 · High Court

citing judgments

Vipin Walia v. ITO

238 Taxmann 1 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

46/273 Taxman 148/426 ITR 502 (Delhi); Vipin Walia v. ITO

382 ITR 19 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 159(2)

Kashmir Singh, Amritsar vs. Ward 1(1), Amritsar

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed on the legal grounds

ITA 381/ASR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar04 Jun 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 250

Sh. Shankar Lal S/O Sh. Bastiram Through Legal Heir Smt. Sudarshana Devi, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panchkula

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

ITA 1234/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1234/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Shankar Lal S/O Shri Bastiram, The Ito, Through L/H Smt. Sudershana Devi, Vs Ward-4, Village – Kaimbwala, Chandigarh. Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abgpl9378P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.2026

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 159(2)Section 2(14)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan, Delhi vs. Nimit Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi

In the result, all the eight appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 3089/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 144Section 159(6)Section 2Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 69A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan, Delhi vs. Nimit Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi

In the result, all the eight appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 3088/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 144Section 159(6)Section 2Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 69A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan, Delhi vs. Nimit Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi

In the result, all the eight appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 3087/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 144Section 159(6)Section 2Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 69A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, Jhandewalan vs. Nimit Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi

In the result, all the eight appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 3086/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 144Section 159(6)Section 2Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 69A

Ishwar Chand Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward 1(3), New Cgo Complex

ITA 2844/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraishwar Chand Aggarwal Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3) 3D-29, Nit Faridabad Nh-4, Nit, Haryana – 121001 Faridabad, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpa5364Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Late Mr Kiritkumar Rasirlal Mehta (Through Legal Heir Uncle Sunil Shah), Sangali vs. ITO Ward 2(2), ITO Ward Two(Two)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 424/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: the notice under Section 148 was issued and, as such, the completion of assessment by the Ld. Assessing Officer in the name of deceased person is void ab initio and, thus, the assessment as framed deserves to be quashed.

Section 1Section 133(6)Section 148Section 250Section 69A

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), New Delhi vs. Pranav Vikas India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, all the eight appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 3087/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 144Section 159(6)Section 2Section 2(11)Section 2(29)Section 69A

ITO, Ward-5, Hisar vs. Vijay Kumar, Hisar

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4167/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshito, Vs. Vijay Kumar, Ward-5, S/O Shri Dev Raj Gpa, Hisar H. No. 1663, Ue-Ii, Hisar, Hisar, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Afcpk9097E Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv Shri Aman Garg, Adv Shri Aayush Garg, Adv Revenue By: Shri Mritunjay Prasad Dwivedi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /11/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mritunjay Prasad Dwivedi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 159(1)Section 159(4)

Sudeep Pandya L/H Lla Jayesh Pandeya, Chhindwara vs. Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur17 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesudeep Pandya L/H, Vs. Pr.Cit, Smt.Ila Jayesh Centralrevenuebuilding, Pandya, Napier Town, 14-15 Patni Jabalpur-482002, Complex, Madhya Pradesh. Parasiya Road, Chhindwara-480001 Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Ahkpp7408G Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri G.N Purohit.Sr.Adv & Smt.Uma Parashar. Adv.Ar Respondent By : Shri Saad Kidwai.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit) Jabalpur Passed U/Sec 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Sudeep Pandya L/H Ila Jayesh Pandya Jabalpur. 1 The Learned Pcit Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case In Passing An Order Under Section 263 Against A Dead Person, The Notice Of Hearing Where Issued In The Name Of Deceased & Were Not Served On The Legal Here The Order Passed Under Section 263 Is Illegal Without Jurisdiction & Void Ab-Intio Same Should Be Placed Into Toto.

For Appellant: Shri G.N Purohit.Sr.Adv &For Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai.CIT-DR

Section 10Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 68