Section 292B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.522

Section 292B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 522 (Return of income, etc., not to be invalid on certain grounds) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 522 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 292B is Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (267 ITR 272), cited in 501 of the 782 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 292B

Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
267 ITR 272 · 2004 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

CBDT and CBEC circulars, along with administrative instructions, are binding on departmental authorities, who must not act in contravention of them. However, these circulars and instructions are not binding on courts or assessees.

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
416 ITR 613 · 2019 · Supreme Court
308
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 to a non-existent entity, such as an amalgamating company post-merger, is a substantive illegality, rendering assessment proceedings void ab initio. Participation in such proceedings does not estop the assessee from challenging the validity of the notice.

Spice Infotainment Ltd. v. CIT
247 CTR 500 · 2012 · High Court
114
citing judgments

An assessment framed in the name of a company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation is invalid, even if the amalgamated company participated in the proceedings. Such a defect cannot be cured under section 292B of the Income-tax Act.

247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd.
370 ITR 288 · 2015 · High Court
98
citing judgments
Savita Kapila v. ACIT
118 Taxmann.com 46 · 2020 · High Court
98
citing judgments

There is no legal requirement for a legal representative to report an assessee's death to the income tax department; consequently, a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 to a deceased person is invalid as it lacks proper jurisdiction.

PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Pvt. Ltd.
443 ITR 194 · 2022 · Supreme Court
95
citing judgments

An assessment framed by the Assessing Officer in the name of a defunct transferor company is valid if the assessee failed to intimate the AO about the merger or amalgamation.

PCIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.
397 ITR 681 · 2017 · High Court
84
citing judgments

For claiming weighted deduction under section 35(2AB), the existence of recognition for a Research and Development (R&D) Centre is relevant, not necessarily the date of approval or recognition.

Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT
186 ITR 278 · 1990 · Supreme Court
79
citing judgments

Upon amalgamation, the amalgamating company ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. Therefore, any assessment or proceeding initiated against a non-existent amalgamating company is invalid as it is no longer considered a 'person' under the Income-tax Act.

Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT
280 ITR 396 · 2006 · High Court
68
citing judgments

Section 292B of the Income Tax Act applies only to procedural irregularities and cannot cure fundamental jurisdictional defects, such as the non-issue of a mandatory Section 148 notice for reassessment or framing an assessment against a non-existing or dead person.

DCIT v. Sunita Finlease Ltd.
330 ITR 491 · 2011 · High Court
60
citing judgments

CBDT administrative instructions and circulars are binding on income tax authorities and departmental officers, who must follow them during the assessment process and cannot act in contravention, even though these instructions are not binding on courts or assessees.

Judgments on Section 292B

ITO - 27(1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Globond India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1995/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1995/Mum/2020 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Income Tax Officer, M/S Globond India B-306, Kailash Esplanade 4, Ward-27(1)(5) Vs. Lbs Road, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai Mumbai-400 086 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aagfg1959A अऩीराथी की ओय े / Appellant By : Smt. Smita Verma, Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े / Respondent By : None स नवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29.09.2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29.09.2021 Aadosa / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-25, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A) -25/It/84/2015-16/491, Vide Dated 22.01.2020. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(2)(5), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 18.03.2015 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). 2. When This Appeal Was Called For Hearing, None Was Present From Assessee. As Seen The Nature Of Additions & The Ground Raised, The Matter Is Heard.

For Appellant: Smt. Smita Verma, DRFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 292BSection 37(1)Section 69C