Which cases are most cited on Section 56(2)(vii)(a)?

Ltd. v. ACIT (149 Taxmann.com 248) — 11 citing judgments; G.R. Viswanath v. ITO (29 ITD 142) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 56(2)(vii)(a)?

BharatTax indexes 42 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act?

Ltd. v. ACIT (149 Taxmann.com 248) is the decision most relied on for Section 56(2)(vii)(a), cited in 11 judgments. The Assessing Officer must provide the assessee with a copy of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, the approval of the competent authority, and the information based on which the notice under section 148 was issued.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.92

Section 56(2)(vii)(a) falls under section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 92 (Income from other sources) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 92 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 56(2)(vii)(a) is Ltd. v. ACIT (149 Taxmann.com 248), cited in 11 of the 42 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii)(a)

Ltd. v. ACIT

149 Taxmann.com 248 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must provide the assessee with a copy of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, the approval of the competent authority, and the information based on which the notice under section 148 was issued.

G.R. Viswanath v. ITO

29 ITD 142 · 1989 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)(a)

Sanjeev Desai, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3447/DEL/2026[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandrasanjeev Desai Vs. Dcit 28, Sundar Nagar, Central Circle – 7 New Delhi – 110 003 New Delhi – 110 055 Pan : Aaapd 0905 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajat Garg, C.A. Revenue By Shri Balkishan Gopal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.08.2026

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Deepak Garg HUF, Panipat vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 467/DEL/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochardeepak Garg Huf, Assessment Unit, House No.39, Kishor Garden, Income Tax Department, Police Chowki, Assandh Raod, V. Panipat-132103 , Haryana (The Assessing Officer Income Tax Department Pan-Aahhd3375E Panipat, Haryana) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Raghubir Singh, Sr. Dr 23.07.2026 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.07.2026

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Sundaramahalingam Narayanan, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 439/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 432 & 439/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Narayanan Sundaramahalingam The Assistant Commissioner Of Rajkumar Vs. Income Tax 27, Kanchi Natarajan Street Central Circle 3(2) Vasudevan Nagar Chennai. Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083 [Pan: Adnpr5990G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N.R.Krishnamoorthy, Fca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E.Pavuna Sudari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.05.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench : The Present Appeals Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”] Both Dated 16.12.2024, Arising Out Of The Assessment Orders Passed U/S.153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income

For Appellant: Shri. N.R.Krishnamoorthy, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. E.Pavuna Sudari, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153C

Narayanan Sundaramahalingam Rajkumar, Chennai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 432/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. N.R.Krishnamoorthy, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. E.Pavuna Sudari, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153C

Subhash Suryakant Phadkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 35(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 3490/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Mr. Subhash Suryakant Phadkar, Income Tax Officer, B-184, Kalpataru Sparkle, Bandra East, Ward 35(3)(4), Vs. Mumbai- 400051 Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Mumbai- 400051 Pan No.Aaapp3456H (Appellant) (Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Makadia, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha P. Kaushik, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 54E

Simatajvar Yusufkhan Khan, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(5), Vadodara

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 243/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us Is The Same, Arising In The Backdrop Of Identical Set Of Facts, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Simatajvar Yusufkhan Khan, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(5), Vadodara

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 242/AHD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Us Is The Same, Arising In The Backdrop Of Identical Set Of Facts, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Simatajvar Yusufkhan Khan, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1(5), Vadodara

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 241/AHD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Us Is The Same, Arising In The Backdrop Of Identical Set Of Facts, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Simatajvar Yusufkhan Khan, Vadodara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(1(5, Vadodara

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 240/AHD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Us Is The Same, Arising In The Backdrop Of Identical Set Of Facts, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Taken Up Together For Hearing & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurugram vs. Sunil Kumar, Gurugram

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

Pravinbhai Jethabhai Patel, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Nadiad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 137/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalpravinbhai Jethabhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Teen Khadki, Nr. Bar Ni Khadki, Ward-5, Village-Nar, Tal. Petlad, Nandiad. Kheda-388150. [Pan :Biqpp9029 K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Jamin Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Bp Makwana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:- This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short), U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri Jamin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri BP Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 210Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(vii)

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Nellore vs. Bathina Srilakshmi, Nellore

ITA 83/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Praveen,DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

Shiv Kumar Jolly, Jammu vs. DCIT (Intl. Tax), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 721/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rishab Singla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 69A

Lalit Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 398/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12 Mr. Lalit Kumar Modi, Vs. Dcit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Circle 11(1), New Delhi-110 014. New Delhi. Pan Aappm4175M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 17(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 69C

Chandarani N.Goyal, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3661/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 251(2)Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)

ITO, Dehradun vs. Smt. Krishna Devi, Dehradun

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4842/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 56(2)(vii)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Agri Gold Foods Farm Estates India Private Limited, Hyderabad

Accordingly. The grounds of appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue for the assessment year 2011-12 are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 796/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण अपीलधर्थी प्रत् यर्थी वर्ा/ A.Y. / Ita No. / Appellant / Respondent 202/Hyd/2018 2009-10 1222/Hyd/2018 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 68

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Agri Gold Farm Estates India Private Limited, Hyderabad

Accordingly. The grounds of appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue for the assessment year 2011-12 are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 214/HYD/2018[2009/10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2023

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 68

Agri Gold Farm Estates India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

Accordingly. The grounds of appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue for the assessment year 2011-12 are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 202/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 68

Agri Gold Farm Estates India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

Accordingly. The grounds of appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue for the assessment year 2011-12 are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1887/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 68