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

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Sons Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1719/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1719/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2004-2005) Acit-2(3), Mumbai-20 Vs. M/S Tata Sons Ltd., Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaact 4060 A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.70/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2004-2005) M/S Tata Sons Ltd., Bombay Vs. Acit-2(3), Mumbai-20 House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaact 4060 A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Manjunatha R Swamy : ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Dinesh Vyas सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/10/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2004-05, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.148 Of The It Act. 2. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. In This Case, The Assessment Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S.148 On 6-3-

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas
Section 10ASection 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148