Which cases are most cited on Section 170(2)?

CIT v. State Bank of Patiala (70 Taxmann.com 36) — 10 citing judgments; Diebold Systems (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.T (144 STC 59) — 6 citing judgments; CIT v. Sony Mobile Communications Ind Pvt. Ltd. (Now (456 ITR 753) — 6 citing judgments; 147 of LPB\n4. ACIT v. Culver Max Entertainment (P.) Ltd. (172 Taxmann.com 85) — 5 citing judgments; Religare Enterprises Limited v. ACIT: (WP No. 13807/2022) (Del) (161 Taxmann.com 484) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 170(2)?

BharatTax indexes 31 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 170(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 170(2) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 170(2) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. State Bank of Patiala (70 Taxmann.com 36) is the decision most relied on for Section 170(2), cited in 10 judgments. The Supreme Court dismisses a revenue appeal concerning depreciation on ATMs on grounds of delay, leaving the substantive question of law open.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.313

Section 170(2) falls under section 170 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 313 (Succession to business or profession otherwise than on death) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 313 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 170(2) is CIT v. State Bank of Patiala (70 Taxmann.com 36), cited in 10 of the 31 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 170(2)

CIT v. State Bank of Patiala

70 Taxmann.com 36 · 2016 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The Supreme Court dismisses a revenue appeal concerning depreciation on ATMs on grounds of delay, leaving the substantive question of law open.

Diebold Systems (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.T

144 STC 59 · 2006 · Reported

citing judgments

CIT v. Sony Mobile Communications Ind Pvt. Ltd. (Now

456 ITR 753 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

147 of LPB\n4. ACIT v. Culver Max Entertainment (P.) Ltd.

172 Taxmann.com 85 · 2025 · ITAT

citing judgments

Religare Enterprises Limited v. ACIT: (WP No. 13807/2022) (Del)

161 Taxmann.com 484 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 170(2)

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shantikunj Investment Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 254/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Aloke Periwal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

Hcp Petrochem Pvt. Ltd, Through I.P. India Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As Adhunik Technology Pvt. Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2308/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishihcp Petrochem Pvt. Ltd, Through Ip Vs. Acit, India Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-18, (Now Known As Adhunik Technology New Delhi Pvt. Ltd, C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv F-36/124, Sector-7, Rohni, New Delhi Pan:Aabci0760K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri SS Rana, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. J.C.B. Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 618/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Baru, CIT DR

Section 143Section 144CSection 92D

Jcb India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 6359/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I. Baru, CIT DR

Section 143Section 144CSection 92D

M/S. Noida Customer Operation (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5191/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(6)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (As Successor in Interest of Erstwhile M/S. Suzuki Powertrain India Ltd.- Since Amalgamated), New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. S. Syal & Smt Suchitra Kamblel.A .No.-902/Del/2017 (Assessment Year-2012-13)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)

ACIT Cir 7(2), Mumbai vs. Suyash Labaoratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for both the years under consideration are dismissed

ITA 4004/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.4003 & 4004/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2005-06 & 2006-07 The Dcit-7(2), M/S. Suyash Laboratories बनाम/ M.K. Road, Ltd., Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Ground Floor, Mahendra Industrial Estate, Road No. 29, Sion (E), Mumbai-400 029 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaeca 7424H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Premanand J ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Vijay Mehta

For Appellant: Shri Premanand JFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 147Section 2(47)Section 43(6)Section 47