Section 72 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 72 is Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT (273 ITR 152), cited in 29 of the 64 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 72

Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd. v. ACIT
273 ITR 152 · 2005 · High Court
29
citing judgments

Allocation of R&D expenditure to eligible units is not clearly warranted when R&D units are maintained within manufacturing units and not as independent entities. This is particularly relevant when the Assessing Officer allocates R&D expenses to Export Oriented Units (EOUs) in the ratio of turnover, and the Commissioner (Appeals) has deleted such additions.

UOP LIC v. Additional Director of Income
108 ITD 186 · 2007 · ITAT
16
citing judgments
CIT v. Hoechst Dyes and Chemicals Pvt Ltd.
240 ITR 1 · 1999 · Supreme Court
12
citing judgments
CIT(A) v. Haryana Hotels Ltd.
276 ITR 521 · 2005 · High Court
11
citing judgments
Zandu Pharmaceuticals Work Ltd. v. CIT
31 Taxmann.com 191 · 2013 · High Court
11
citing judgments
CIT v. Black & Veatch Consulting (P.) Ltd.
20 Taxmann.com 727 · 2012 · High Court
11
citing judgments
94) (SC); (ii) Nandi Steels Ltd. v. ACIT (436 ITR 22S) (Kar HC); (iii) Digital Electronics ltd. Vs. ADIT
16 Taxmann.com 316 · 2011 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Solvent & Vanaspati Industries Ltd. 16 DTR 492 (Asr Trib.) 2. Suresh Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
27 Taxmann.com 203 · 2012 · ITAT
6
citing judgments
Nandi Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT (436 ITR 22S) (Kar HC); (iii) Digital Electronics ltd. v. ADIT (
432 ITR 277 · 2021 · High Court
5
citing judgments
CIT v. Yokogava India Ltd.
77 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 72

S-NET FREIGHT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 22(1), DELHI

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

ITA 3655/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumars-Net Freight (India) Limited, Ito, 301, 3Rd Floor In Aggarwal Ward-22(1), Metro Mall, Plot No.23, Vs. Delhi. Sector-20, Dwarka, Delhi-110075, Pan:Aafcs3703G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tanpreet Singh Kohli, Ca Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Order Dated 12.12.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 30.10. 2017 Of The Ld. Assessing Officer/ Income Tax Officer, Ward- 22(1), New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ao’) For Asst. Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 30.11.2015 Declaring Loss Of Rs.4,98,350/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) Dated 08.04.2016 & Notice 142(1) Along With Detailed S-Net Freight (India) Private Ltd. Vs. Ito

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 250(6)Section 72

PANKAJ AGARWAL,KANPUR vs. THE AO SPECIAL RANGE,, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Pankaj Agarwal, 7/151, Ratan Vs. The Assessing Officer, Majestic, Opp. Sony World, Special Range, Kanpur- Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur-208002 208001 Pan: Abnpa4816E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.02.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 9.01.2024 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Ao, Special Range, Kanpur, Passed Under Section 143(3) On 26.09.2019. 2. It Is Seen From The Record That The Appeal Is Delayed By 2 Days. However, Since The Date Of Filing Is Preceded By Saturday & Sunday, Wherein The Offices Of The Itat Were Closed, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Treating The Loss Of Rs.42,17,895/- Being Loss On Account Of Trading In Derivatives As A Capital Loss As Against Business Loss Claimed By The Assessee, Which Finding Of The Ao Being Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, The Addition Made Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 44ASection 72Section 74

INDIAN CLEARING CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDISSIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

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

ITA 6381/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2018-19 Indian Clearing Corporation Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, 25Th Floor, P.J. Tower, Vs. Circle-1(2)(1), Dalal Street, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aabci7140K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Niraj Sheth A/W. Ms. Niyati Parikh For Revenue : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 18-02-2026 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth a/wFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 72

EAST DELHI WASTE PROCESSING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 7(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3463/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesheast Delhi Waste Processing Vs. Dcit, Company Pvt. Ltd, Circle-7(1), 221, Okhla Industrial Area, Delhi Phase-Iii, Okhla Industrial Estate, South Delhi, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaco7539D

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Rawal, CIT DR
Section 154Section 241(2)Section 242(2)Section 79

M/S SHIVANSH INFRAESTATE PVT.LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. DY. CIT RANGE-6, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 106/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 M/S Shivansh Infraestate Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Block-A, Surajdeep Income Tax, Range-6, 3Rd Floor, Complex, 1-Jopling Road, 27/2, Raja Ram Mohan Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001 P.K. Complex, Lucknow Pan: Aaqcs5896P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.02.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 18.01.2024 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Dated 30.12.2017. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1- The Ld. Cit (A) Nfac Erred On Facts & In Law In Dismissing The Ground That Notice U/S 143(2) Was Issued By Ito-6(1) Lucknow On 01.04.2016 Without Appreciating That Jurisdiction Of Case Lies With Dcit, Range-6, Lucknow, Hence The Notice Issued By Ito-6(1) Is Without Jurisdiction & Invalid. Further, No Notice U/S 143(2) Has Been Issued By Jurisdictional Dcit, Range-Vi, Lucknow Within The Period As Per Section 143(2) Of L. T. Act. Hence The Present Assessment Is Invalid, Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. 2- The Ld. C.I.T. (A) Upheld The Addition Without Appreciating That Ld. A. O. Rejected The Books Of Account & Instead Of Estimating The Net Profit, Additions Were Made On The Basis Of Same Books Of Account By Disallowing Expenses Under Different Heads Total Rs. 1,75,91,607/- & Addition U/S 68 R. W. S. 115Bbe Of I. T. Act For Rs. 1,32,78,833/- Which Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Law.

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

MITHI SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2371/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2371/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mithi Software Technologies V The Income Tax Private Limited, S Officer, 101, Mayfair Court, Nachiket Ward-14(3), Pune. Park, Baner Road, Pune – 411045. Pan: Aabcm9352P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Agra Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2014-15 Dated 25.08.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Of

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 41(1)Section 72

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1002/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 14ASection 154

PARVINDAR INDAR SINGH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1001/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 14ASection 154

MRS. DEEPALI VIKKI AJMERA,MULUND vs. ITO WARD 27(1)(1), MUMBAI, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4981/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2020-21 Mrs. Deepali Vikki Ajmera, Ito Ward 27 (1) (1), 5Th Floor, Prem Ratna Building, Tower 6, Vashi Station Ambedkar, Road Opp. Balaji Vs. Complex, Navi Mumbai – Temple, Mulund West, Mumbai 400703. – 400080. Pan – Agvps 7279 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Piyush Bafna, Ca (Virtually Appear) Revenue By : Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 281 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal, On Which The Assessee Has Claimed As Under :- Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay 1, Mrs. Deepali Vikki Ajmera, Age About 45 Years, Residing At 5Th Floor, Prem Ratna Building, Ambedkar Road, Opp Balaji Temple

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Bafna, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.M.K. Mahadevan, SR. D.R
Section 250

TAHOORA PROTEINS,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 NOW WARD-1, GODHRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1613/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115Section 115BSection 133ASection 14Section 143(3)Section 69

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPN. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1596/AHD/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, Advocate and Shri Jimi Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)

M. SONS GEMS N JEWELLERY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4549/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2015-16] M. Sons Gems N Jewellery Acit Pvt. Ltd. 4852/24, First Floor, Central Circle – 20 Near Sanjivan Hospital Vs New Delhi Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi Pan-Aadcm9406A Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 251Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43B

ROLON SEALS INTERNATIONAL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 947/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.947/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2023-2024 Rolon Seals International, The Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad – 500 063. Vs. Ward-11(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aarfr2216G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri Sashank Dundu, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri Sashank Dundu, AdvocateFor Respondent: G Saratha, Sr. AR
Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

TAMILNADU CO-OPERATIVE UNION,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 59/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble George George K & Hon’Ble Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.Reddy Prakash, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 10Section 143(3)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. VISTEON ENGG. CENTRE (I) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 625/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.625/Pun/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Amit BobdeFor Respondent: Shri Paras S. Savla
Section 10ASection 143(3)

PONNAPULA SULOCHANA, L/R OF LATE PONNAPULA SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 295/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

PONAPULA SULOCHANA LR LATE P SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

ARUS PROPERTIES LLP,,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., EXEMPT - 1, CIRCLE - 1(1),, KOLKATA

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

ITA 533/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 533/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-2024 Arus Properties Llp,………………………..….…Appellant 7B, Pretoria Street, ‘Alom House’, Kolkata-700071 [Pan:Abcfa4787H] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…….Respondent Exempt-1, Circle-1(1), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri P.J. Bhide, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Ms. Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: October 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 132(9)Section 71

SATYAM TRANSFORMERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(3), AURANGABAD

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

ITA 1239/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1239/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Ito, Ward-2(3), Sharadanand, Opposite Telephone Office, Aurangabad Ajabnagar, Aurangabad-431001 Vs. Pan : Aakcs4648D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 Date Of 27-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 72

SUPERTEX INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 4(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4649/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S, Hon’Blesupertex Industries Ltd., Dcit Circle 4(3)(2), 45-49 Babu Genu Road, Mumbai. Vs. Princess Street, Kalbadevi, Mumbai 400 002. Pan Aaacs7274D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary-Sr AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 3(1)(o)

Showing 1–20 of 64 · Page 1 of 4