Which cases are most cited on Section 37BA?

CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co. (357 ITR 396) — 48 citing judgments; 58 SOT 135 (Cut) (Uro) Gobindpada Bhanja Chowdhury v. ITO (352 ITR 273) — 25 citing judgments; Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani (242 ITR 638) — 18 citing judgments; Naresh Bhavani Shah (HUF) v. CIT (84 Taxmann.com 53) — 13 citing judgments; LSG Sky Chef India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (45 Taxmann.com 256) — 11 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 37BA?

BharatTax indexes 74 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 37BA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 37BA of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 37BA of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co. (357 ITR 396) is the decision most relied on for Section 37BA, cited in 48 judgments. An assessee is entitled to credit for TDS even if the certificate is issued in the name of a joint venture or related party, provided the income to which the TDS relates is offered by the assessee. This principle emphasizes looking at the substance of the transaction over strict adherence to the name on the TDS certificate.

The decision most relied on for Section 37BA is CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co. (357 ITR 396), cited in 48 of the 74 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 37BA

CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co.

357 ITR 396 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to credit for TDS even if the certificate is issued in the name of a joint venture or related party, provided the income to which the TDS relates is offered by the assessee. This principle emphasizes looking at the substance of the transaction over strict adherence to the name on the TDS certificate.

58 SOT 135 (Cut) (Uro) Gobindpada Bhanja Chowdhury v. ITO

352 ITR 273 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

The case is cited for a procedural point in relation to assessment or appeal proceedings. It appears in a list of cases before a discussion of an additional ground raised before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Asst. CIT v. Om Prakash Gattani

242 ITR 638 · 2000 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee cannot be denied the credit of tax deducted at source (TDS) if they produce Form 16A, and any demand notice issued under Section 221(1) for non-payment of tax, when TDS credit is due, cannot be sustained.

Naresh Bhavani Shah (HUF) v. CIT

84 Taxmann.com 53 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) can be given to a person other than the deductee if certain conditions are met, including the filing of a declaration as prescribed by Rule 37BA(2).

LSG Sky Chef India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

45 Taxmann.com 256 · 2014 · Reported

citing judgments

An assessee cannot be denied credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) solely due to a mismatch in Form 26AS if the mismatch is not attributable to the assessee. The burden of proving why Form 26AS does not reflect all TDS details should not be placed on the assessee.

Delhi in Schneider Electric India Ltd. v. CIT

171 Taxmann 177 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

5 SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. vs. I SOT 616); Arvind Murjani Brands (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

137 ITD 173 · 2012 · ITAT

citing judgments

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. ITAT

359 ITR 371 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

Ltd. vs. ADIT (2009) (132 TTJ 218); Fidelity Investment Trust Fidelity Overseas Fund v. ADIT

36 SOT 22 · ITAT

citing judgments

DCIT v. Sunita Khemka

71 Taxmann.com 345 · 2016 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 37BA

Hiteshkumar Mohanlal Desai, Daman vs. The Assessment Unit, ITO, Daman Ward, Daman

Appeal is allowed

ITA 962/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year : 2018-19 Hiteshkumar Mohanlal The Assessment Unit, Desai, 247-2 Dungari Income Tax Department. Faliya, Kachigam, Nani बनाम/ Daman, Daman-396210 Vs. Pan: Akcpd 6850 F (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sankar Sharma, Ca Revenue By Shri Om Prakash Jha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2026

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 199Section 2(47)(v)Section 45Section 45(1)

Rithwik Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 2(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1915/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jul 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.A. Mathivanan, Sr.AR

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. Siva Industries and Holdings Limited, Chennai

In the result, assessee’s Appeal is partly allowed and revenue’s

ITTPA 29/CHNY/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./It (Tp)A No.28/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Siva Industries & Holdings V. Deputy Commissioner Limited, Of Income Tax 113-114, A Block, B Wing Mena Corporate Circle-3(1), Kampala Arcade, 3Rd Floor, Sir Chennai Thyagaraya Road, T Nagar, Chennai 600017 [Pan: Aaacs4460M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A Appellant/Assessee By ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By Mr. Arv Srinivasan, Cit आयकर अपील सं./It (Tp)A No.29/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Siva Industries & Holdings Limited, Income Tax Corporate 113-114, A Block, B Wing Circle-3(1), Chennai Mena Kampala Arcade, 3Rd Floor, Sir Thyagaraya Road, T Nagar, Chennai 600017 [Pan: Aaacs4460M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ : Mr. Arv Srinivasan, Cit Appellant/Department By ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A. सुनवाईक!तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2026 : 27.04.2026 घोषणाक!तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Respondent: Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle3(1), Chennai

In the result, assessee’s Appeal is partly allowed and revenue’s

ITTPA 28/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

For Respondent: Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Divya Dinesh, Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 2195/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80G

Aditya Birla Sun Life Amc Limited, Maharashtra vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 6(1)(1), Maharashtra

ITA 6702/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

Glen Morgan D Costa, Mumbai vs. ITO Int Tax Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 6573/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: The Learned Cit(A), The Assessee Submitted That He, Along With His Wife, Owned A Property, Each Having 50% Ownership. The Said Property Was Sold During The Relevant Financial Year For A Total Consideration Of Rs. 1 Crore & The Amount Was Credited By The Purchaser In The Joint Bank Account Of The Assessee With His Wife. The Assessee Submitted That The Tds Amounting To Rs.22,88,000/- Was Deducted By The Purchaser Under Section 194-Ia Of The Act On The Pan Of The Assessee. However, Both The Assessee & His Wife Computed Their Respective Capital Gains Tax At A 50% Share Of The Sale

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 194Section 195

Jerambhai Ratnabhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. CPC, Bangalore Present Jurisdiction the ITO, Ward-5(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1531/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Vijay H Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 199

Powergrid Rampur Sambhal Transmission Limited, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 20(1), Delhi

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5236/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Shri Ved Jain, Adv., Shri Pawan Garg

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 199Section 244ASection 250

Vinubhai Becharbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 60/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 60/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2023-24 Vinubhai Vecharbhai Patel Deputy Director Of Income Tax बनाम/ 20, Signature Residency, Opp. Cpc-Through V/S. Suvarna Bungalows, 100 Ft Jurisdictional Assessing Road, Thaltej, Officer, Ahmedabad – 380059 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aatpp 8055 H (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jimi Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Garg, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Jimi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Garg, SR-DR

Section 143(1)Section 250

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Panvel Circle Panvel, Panvel vs. Gateway Terminals India Pvt Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue and the three COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 693/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Manish KanthFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Rajesh P Gawali

Section 143(1)Section 199

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Panvel Circle Panvel, Panvel vs. Gateway Terminals India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue and the three COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 692/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: HeardITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Manish KanthFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Rajesh P Gawali

Section 143(1)Section 199

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Panvel Circle Panvel, Panvel vs. Gateway Terminals India Pvt Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue and the three COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 691/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Pune15 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Manish KanthFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Rajesh P Gawali

Section 143(1)Section 199

Bvg Developrs, Pune vs. Income Tax Authority, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1057/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Gauri S ManjrekarFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

Section 143(1)

Bvg Developrs, Pune vs. Income Tax Authority, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1053/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Gauri S ManjrekarFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

Section 143(1)

Florida Retirement System, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation -2(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 1866/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

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

Section 115ASection 144Section 144CSection 234Section 234BSection 270ASection 70Section 70(2)

Abdul Rahman Asad, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Intl. Tax 1(1)(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2433/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Abdul Rahman Asad, Vs. Dcit, House No.47, Behind Jain Mandi, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(1), Mohalla Barihat, New Delhi. Bahraich – 271 801 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aofpa6981F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Alok Vasant, Fca Ms. Poonam Ahuja, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Order : 12.11.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Delhi - 42 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 03.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Is A Non-Resident & Filed The Original Return Of Income For Ay 2022-23 On 27.07.2022 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs.4,86,560/- (Income From House Property Rs.4,64,444/-, Income From Other Sources Rs.32,115/- & Loss From Long

For Appellant: Shri Alok Vasant, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 199