What is the leading case on Section 164(1) of the Income Tax Act?

U.P. Forest Corporation v. DCIT (165 Taxmann 533) is the decision most relied on for Section 164(1), cited in 10 judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 164(1)?

BharatTax indexes 70 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 164(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 164(1) of the Income Tax Act

Q: Which cases are most cited on Section 164(1)?

U.P. Forest Corporation v. DCIT (165 Taxmann 533) — 10 citing judgments; 266 (Chennai-Trib.). 10. Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (140 Taxmann.com 420) — 3 citing judgments.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.307

Section 164(1) falls under section 164 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 307 (Charge of tax where share of beneficiaries unknown) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 307 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 164(1) is U.P. Forest Corporation v. DCIT (165 Taxmann 533), cited in 10 of the 70 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 164(1)

U.P. Forest Corporation v. DCIT

165 Taxmann 533 · 2007 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

266 (Chennai-Trib.). 10. Effluent & Water Treatment Engineers (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

140 Taxmann.com 420 · 2022 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 164(1)

Sri Gautam Chakraborty, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-34(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 1746/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

Section 164(1)

ITO 23(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Dhfl Venture Capital Fund, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5914/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sailee Meghraj- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari-Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 164(1)Section 61

Smt Alpana Kirlloskar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3403/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishismt Alpana Kirloskar, Vs. Acit, 115, Ansal Bhawan, Circle-52(1), 16, Kg Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aarpk0165B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri RN Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 10(34)Section 143Section 147(1)Section 148Section 160Section 164

ITO 23(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Milestone Army Nay Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4958/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer -23(2)(3) V. M/S. Milestone Army Navy Trust Room No. 110 602, Hallmark Business Plaza, 1St Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg, Grant Road (W), Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 007 Pan No: Aactm 0102 F

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh TrivediFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 61

Shrestha Kajaria Benefit Trust, Kolkata vs. ITO, W-43(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 726/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 726/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shrestha Kajaria Benefit Trust..............................………………………Appellant 74/2, Ajc Bose Road, Suit 5E Kolkata – 700016 [Pan: Aagts2871M] Ito, Ward 73(4)...................…………………………………………………….Respondent 3, Govt. Place, Ground Floor Kolkata - 700001 Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwala, Aca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 18, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 13 , 2017 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 13, Kolkata Dated 22.01.2016 & The Grounds Raised Therein By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That The Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-12, Kolkata. 2. That The Cases Is Directed Towards The Single Issue Involved About The Action Of Ld. Cit (A) To Upheld The Act Of The Ld. Ito In Applying The Maximum Marginal Rate Of Tax (At 30%) On The Trust In Spite All The Conditions Of Section 161(1) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 Are Fulfilled & The Trust Should Be Taxed As Status Of Individual. 3. That The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Not Observing The Fact That The Maximum Marginal Rate Of Tax Was Applied That The Maximum Marginal Rate Of Tax Was Applied To The Assessee By The Ld. Ito By Passing Order U/S 143(1) Without Giving Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Assessee & Charging Tax At The Maximum Marginal Rates Of Taxes.

Section 143(1)Section 161(1)Section 164Section 164(1)

Income Tax Officer, Hubli vs. M/S.Vasavi Seva Sangh, Hubli

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 385/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: None

Section 164(1)

The Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. India Advantage Fund-VII

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/191/2015HC Karnataka01 Feb 2017

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA

Section 260

Nanji Ganpat Chheda Discreationary Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(2)(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose only

ITA 5618/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 Nanji Ganpat Chheda Income Tax Officer-20(2)(4), Discretionary Trust, 409, Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ 7, Krashna Mahal, 94, T.V. Lalbaug, Vs. Parmeshwaran Marg, Mumbai-400012 Matunga, Mumbai-400019 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaaan4192K

Section 164(1)