Which cases are most cited on Section 167B?

CIT v. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346) — 129 citing judgments; CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s (108 ITR 555) — 46 citing judgments; CIT v. Sae Head Office Monthly Paid Employees Welfare Trust (271 ITR 159) — 30 citing judgments; CIT v. Shree Krishna Bandar Trust (247 ITR 1) — 23 citing judgments; Araadhya Jain Trust v. ITO (173 Taxmann.com 343) — 22 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 167B?

BharatTax indexes 178 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 167B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 167B of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 167B of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346) is the decision most relied on for Section 167B, cited in 129 judgments. The term 'tax' includes surcharge and cess. Surcharge and additional surcharge are considered components of income tax, which can be levied as a basic charge, surcharge, special surcharge, and additional surcharge.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.311

Section 167B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 311 (Charge of tax where shares of members in association of persons or body of individuals unknown, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 311 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 167B is CIT v. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346), cited in 129 of the 178 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 167B

CIT v. K. Srinivasan

83 ITR 346 · 1972 · Supreme Court

129

citing judgments

The term 'tax' includes surcharge and cess. Surcharge and additional surcharge are considered components of income tax, which can be levied as a basic charge, surcharge, special surcharge, and additional surcharge.

CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s

108 ITR 555 · 1977 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Where the shares of beneficiaries in a trust are determinate, trustees must be assessed separately for each beneficiary's share, treating each beneficiary as an individual. The income is then taxed at the marginal rate applicable to individuals, not at the maximum rate for an association of persons.

CIT v. Sae Head Office Monthly Paid Employees Welfare Trust

271 ITR 159 · 2004 · High Court

citing judgments

Beneficiaries of a trust do not set up the trust, and trustees derive authority from the trust deed, meaning neither trustees nor beneficiaries form an association for a common purpose solely due to their existence.

CIT v. Shree Krishna Bandar Trust

247 ITR 1 · 2001 · High Court

citing judgments

An Assessing Officer can rectify a mistake apparent from the record under Section 154 if the assessee is erroneously taxed at individual rates when it should have been taxed as an AOP.

Araadhya Jain Trust v. ITO

173 Taxmann.com 343 · 2025 · ITAT

citing judgments

The definition of maximum marginal rate under section 2(29C) can be interpreted to determine the applicable surcharge rates, particularly for income including dividends, as per the First Schedule to the Finance Act. This affects how surcharge is calculated on taxable income.

ITO v. Tayal Sales Corporation

1 SOT 579 · 2003 · ITAT

citing judgments

The maximum marginal rate (MMR) of income tax is applied, and surcharge is levied separately if applicable. Surcharge is not leviable if the quantum of income is below a certain threshold.

Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT

404 ITR 564 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

Adjustments under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be made for issues where divergent views are possible or the issue is debatable. Such adjustments are permissible only for clear mistakes apparent from the record.

Madhukar C. Ashar v. Union of India

239 Taxmann 367 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

The principle of consistency must be followed in assessments when there is no change in circumstances.

CIT v. CV Divakaran Family Trust

122 Taxmann 405 · 2002 · High Court

citing judgments

JKs Employees Welfare Fund v. ITO

199 ITR 765 · 1993 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 167B

Mahalaxmi Construction Co, Bhayandar West vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax CPC Bangeluru, Bangeluru

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4008/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 255(3)

Lintas Employees Recreation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

Lintas Employees Recreation Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 31/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2

Sanjiv Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1376/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vasanti B. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

Sanjiv Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1375/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vasanti B. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai vs. ACIT Exemption Circle 2, Mumbai

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

ITA 392/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthanFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui

Section 11Section 12ASection 154Section 167B

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2817/PUN/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare

Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2816/PUN/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare

Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2560/PUN/2024[AAATN9300L]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare

Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

Iei Shareholding (Cultural Activities 1987) Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5722/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankariei Shareholding (Cultural Vs Ito, Ward 22(2)(1), Mumbai Activities 1987) Trust, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbaiion House, 4Thfloor, Mumbai. Dr. E. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 011. Pan : Aaat10078E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: ShriMotichand GuptaFor Respondent: Shri KiranUnavekar, SR. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 164(1)Section 167Section 250

Nam Group Aslali, Ahmedabad vs. AO, CPC, Bangalore-Present -the ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1611/AHD/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1610/Ahd/2024 & 1611/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2022-23 & 2023-24 Respectively Nam Group Aslali The Ao, Cpc बनाम/ 172/1, Premchand House Bangalore - V/S. Old High Court Way Present Ito Ashram Road Ward-3(1)(1) Ahmedabad Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Aaaan 0551 C (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.F. Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastav, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both The Appeals, Filed By The Assessee Pertain To Assessment Years (Ays) 2022-23 & 2023-24 & Arise From The Orders Passed By The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit-10 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] In Upholding The Levy Of Surcharge At The Maximum Marginal Rate Under Section 167B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”]. The Levy Of Surcharge Was Determined Pursuant To Intimations Issued By The Cpc, Bengaluru Under Section 143(1) Of The Act. Since The Facts & Grounds Of Appeal For Both Years Are Identical

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastav, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 167BSection 167B(2)Section 26Section 67ASection 86

Nam Group Aslali, Ahmedabad vs. AO, CPC, Bangalore- Present ITO. Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1610/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastav, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 167BSection 167B(2)Section 26Section 67ASection 86

Estate of Late Nalini Atul Bhagwati, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2177/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2021-22 Estate Of Late Nalini Atul Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Bhagwati, Cpc, Bangalore. 201, Sukh Castle, Vs. Bhandarkar Road, Ito, Ward-6(1)(1), Matunga (E), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Mumbai. Pan : Aabae5222A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rahul Hakani, Revenue By : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/01/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.DR

Section 167BSection 168Section 168(1)

Institute Management Committee Iti Kuzhalmannam, Palakkad vs. ACIT, Palakkad

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 246/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Hemanth P., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 167B

Shri Brtalish Dash Hummad Jain Chokhla Punch Sanchalit Keshavlal Maganlal, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 166/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

Shri Betalish Dash Hummad Jain Chokhla Punch Sanchalit Keshavlal Maganlal, Ahmedabad vs. The Commissioner of Incometax(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 165/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

Abhisek Educational and Charitable Trust, Bhubaneswar vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan

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

ITA 346/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2017-18 Abhisek Abhisek Educational Educational & And Vs. Income Income Tax Tax Officer, Officer, Charitable Trust, Mig Charitable Trust, Mig-B-18, Exemption Exemption Ward, Ward, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. No.Aacta 5203 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.C.Jena,Ca Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr Dr , Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/11/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/11/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena,CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 154Section 167BSection 32