What is the leading case on Section 47 of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Texspin Engg. & Mfg. Works (263 ITR 345) is the decision most relied on for Section 47, cited in 23 judgments.

Which cases are most cited on Section 47?

CIT v. Texspin Engg. & Mfg. Works (263 ITR 345) — 23 citing judgments; CIT v. Scindia Steam Naviagation Co. Ltd. (125 ITR 118) — 4 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 47?

BharatTax indexes 54 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 47 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 47 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 47 is CIT v. Texspin Engg. & Mfg. Works (263 ITR 345), cited in 23 of the 54 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 47

CIT v. Texspin Engg. & Mfg. Works

263 ITR 345 · 2003 · High Court

citing judgments

CIT v. Scindia Steam Naviagation Co. Ltd.

125 ITR 118 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 47

ACIT(OSD), RANGE-10, ITO CR BUILDING vs. GAGAN INFRAENERGY LIMITED, NAJAFGARH

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 3183/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalacit (Osd) Range-10 Vs. Gaganinfraenergy Limited Ito Cr Building 28, Najafgarh Road, Room No. 405,Ip Estate Delhi-15 New Delhi – 110002 Delhi "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcn6118L Appellant .. Respondent Co No.100/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Gaganinfraenergy Vs. Acit (Osd) Range-10 Limited, 28, Najafgarh Ito Cr Building Road, Room No. 405,Ip Estate Delhi – 110015 New Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcn6118L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. PoojaSwaroop, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 45Section 68

THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly, the AO, vide draft assessment order, disallowed the

ITA 7393/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Anmol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 32(1)

BRAWNY NIVESH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 571/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 3Section 47Section 56Section 56(2)(via)Section 56(2)(viia)

KAMARAJ PRIYA,TIRUVARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TIRUVARUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2484/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2484/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 V. The Ito, Kamaraj Priya, 2/94, Chinnaian Street, Ward-1, Karuvakurichi, Tiruvarur 614 018. Tiruvarur. [Pan:Dwqpp1186K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148

M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 32/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

A.C.I.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

SIGNODE INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 240/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 32

DEB PRASANNA CHOUDHURY,KOLKATA vs. ADIT/DCIT (IT) - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2199/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

RAMESH JAISINGHANI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 980/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

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

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 50(2)(ec)Section 55(2)(aa)Section 55(2)(ac)Section 55(2)(as)Section 56(2)(ac)

VITP PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 573/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.573 & 574/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vitp Private Limited Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) Pan:Aaccv2672G Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Advocates Percy Perdiwala & Mahima Goud राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Shri Shahnawaz-Ul-Rahman, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 08/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Two Appeals Are Filed By Vitp Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad, (“Ld.Pcit”), Dated 30/03/2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. As Both The Appeals Are Interrelated & Belongs To The Same, Both Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Advocates Percy Perdiwala andFor Respondent: : Shri Shahnawaz-ul-Rahman

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 263Section 80Section 801A

VISHAL FURNISHING LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4550/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Vishal Furnishing Limited Assistant Commissioner Of Income 211, Shiv Shakti Industrial Complex, Tax, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai. Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400011. Pan/Gir No. Aaacr2138K (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rahul Hakkani Respondent By : Shri Vivek Perampurna (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.10.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1) The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Assessment Order Was Passed In Violation Of The Principles Of Natural Justice & Contrary To The Scheme Of Assessment & Hence The Assessment Order Was A Nullity & Deserves To Be Quashed. 2) The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Order Of Ao Disallowing Depreciation On Goodwill Of Rs 4,12,73,088/- (As Claimed In Accounts) Without Appreciating That Goodwill Had Arisen On Amalgamation & Was Eligible For Depreciation U/S 32 & Hence The Addition Of Rs 4,12,73,088/-May Be Deleted. Vishal Furnishing Limited

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakkaniFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT DR)

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(va)

AGRI GOLD FOODS AND FARM PRODUCTS LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 2000/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)

DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the assessee are partly allowed, and the additional ground of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4069/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry – Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta - CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260ASection 43BSection 45Section 801ASection 801A(4)

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. RATAN KUMAR INGU, HYDERABAD

ITA 573/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.573/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri Ratan Kumar Ingu (International Taxation)-I Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaxpi4387F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 148Section 50C