Section 16A of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 16A is Thiduvil Balakrishnan v. DCIT (151 Taxmann.com 484), cited in 5 of the 28 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 16A

Thiduvil Balakrishnan v. DCIT
151 Taxmann.com 484 · 2023 · ITAT
5
citing judgments
Kshema Geo Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. ITO
151 Taxmann.com 293 · 2023 · High Court
3
citing judgments
DCIT v. Kalindi Rail Nirman Engg. Ltd.
52 SOT 137 · 2012 · ITAT
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 16A

Jagat Singh, Khurja vs. ITO, Ward 3(2), Bulandshahr

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

ITA 7428/DEL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(14)Section 250Section 50CSection 54F

Rajni Arvind Birla, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Ms. Shrunjal Shah, A.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 153Section 154Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

Kuber Vasantrao Kenjale, Pune vs. ITO Ward 6(5), Pune

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

ITA 2331/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 234CSection 54ESection 54F

Bhrugesh Atulvadan Lakhiara, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 329/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr DR
Section 16A

DCIT-CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. Kopran Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4625/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Bhupendra Karkhanis a/w. ShriFor Respondent: Shri. Biswanath Das-CIT DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 40Section 41Section 43B

Vicki Electronics, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-31(3)()5), Mumbai

ITA 1581/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarvs. Income Tax Officer Vicki Electronics, Gala 31(3)(5), Bandra Kurla No. 23, Back Side Complex, Sidhpura Industrial Mumbai –400051 Estate, Off. S.V. Road, Goregaon (W), Mumbai – 400062. Pan/Gir No. Aaafv0824B (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 50Section 55A

Mohammed Khalid Habib Parihar, Mumbai vs. I.T.O., Ward-31(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3345/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 50C

Dhiraj S. Makhijani L/H of Late Shyamlal A Makhijani, Godhra vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITSSA 236/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

Lords Fincap Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle - 15(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 6980/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Nitin Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT- DR
Section 131

DCIT, Central Circle Ajmer vs. Vijay Granimarmo Private Limited, Naya Ghar Gulab Bari Ajmer

In the result of the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 647/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2024AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. C. M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H)
Section 143(3)

Shri V Selvaraj vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income

The appeal is allowed

ITA/92/2018HC Karnataka19 Aug 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 260A

Mohamed Nayeem, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 7(4), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 213/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 213/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 M. Mohamed Nayeem, Income Tax Officer, No. 94, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 7(4), J.J. Complex, Chennai. Thirumangalam, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Aeypm 6644L]

For Respondent: Shri. Suresh Periasamy. JCIT
Section 50C

Swami Satyananda, Haridwar vs. ITO, Ward - 50(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1614/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1614/Kol/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Swami Satyananda Vs. Ito, Ward-50(3), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Ganguly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 16ASection 16A(5)Section 55A

Sh. Rajinder Kumar Chadha, Beas vs. Income Tax Officer, Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 28/ASR/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A No.28/Asr/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2003-04 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Shri Rajinder Kumar Chadha, Vs. Income Tax Officer, K/105, Dera Baba Jaimal Singh, Ward-4(3) Amritsar Beas Pan:Abipc 5206 H अपीलाथ"Appellant अपीलाथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 254

Shri Ramesh Mangal, Indore vs. The ACIT 3(1), Indore

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

ITA 461/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

For Appellant: S/Shri Anil Kamal Garg & ArpitFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

Karanbhai Bharatbhai Gangdev, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 139/RJT/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Pravenn S. Verma, Sr.DR
Section 50C

Nikhil Agarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 3572/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Singhal, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 142ASection 16ASection 55ASection 69

Lovy Ranka, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Circle 5(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 2107/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Us, But Then, As Is The Settled Legal Position, When A Reference Is Made To The Dvo, The Assessing Officer Has A Duty To “So Far As The Valuation Of The Asset In Question Is Concerned, Proceed To Complete The Assessment In Conformity With The Estimate Of The Valuation Officer”. The Question Then Arises Whether We Can Deal With The Question Of Correctness Of The Dvo’S Report- Particularly When The Assessing Officer Apparently Has No Say In This Regard.

Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50Section 50C(2)

Keyaa Exim Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 697/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Acherya, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Sh Sharvan Kumar Sharma vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/49/2018HC Rajasthan03 Jul 2018
Section 50CSection 52Section 53A