Section 375 — Procedure when assessee claims identical question of law is pending before High Court or Supreme Court. Successor to s.158A of the 1961 Act.
Section 375 is in Chapter XVIII — Appeals Revisions and Alternate Dispute Resolutions, which runs from section 356 to section 389.
Sub-section (1) lets an assessee whose case for one tax year is pending before the Assessing Officer or an appellate authority declare, in the prescribed form, that a question of law in it is identical with one already pending in his own case for another year — before the High Court on a reference under section 256 or an appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before the Supreme Court under section 257 or 261 of that Act, before the High Court under section 365, before the Supreme Court under section 367, or in a Special Leave Petition under article 136 — and that if the final decision there is applied to the pending case, he will not raise the question again. Sub-section (2) requires an appellate authority receiving the declaration to call for the Assessing Officer's report on the correctness of the claim and to hear him if he asks. Sub-section (3) requires a written order admitting the claim if the questions are found identical or rejecting it if not, and sub-section (4) makes that order final and not open to appeal or revision under the Act. Sub-section (5) allows the relevant case to be disposed of without waiting for the other case, and bars the assessee from raising the question in appeal or in a subsequent appeal before a higher forum; sub-section (6) requires the final decision, when it comes, to be applied and the disposing order amended in conformity if necessary. Sub-section (7) defines "appellate authority" as the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner (Appeals) or Appellate Tribunal, "case", and "subsequent appeal before a higher forum".
It lets one pending decision settle the same recurring question across an assessee's other years without each year being separately litigated, in exchange for the assessee giving up the right to argue that question again. The finality in sub-section (4) and the bar in sub-section (5)(b) are the price of the convenience.
The mechanism only works on your own case for another year — a question pending in someone else's litigation, however identical, is outside sub-section (1)(a). Once you file the declaration and it is admitted, the relevant year can be decided straight away without waiting for the higher court, and you cannot raise that question in any appeal from it, including before the High Court or Supreme Court. If the claim is rejected, sub-section (4) closes off appeal and revision against that rejection. When the other case is finally decided, the decision must be applied and the order amended if necessary, so the outcome still reaches your year — but only through this route.
An assessee's appeal for one tax year is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the same question of law that is already before the High Court, on an appeal under section 365, in his own case for an earlier year. He furnishes the prescribed declaration; the Commissioner (Appeals) calls for the Assessing Officer's report under sub-section (2), hears him, admits the claim by written order and then disposes of the pending year at once without waiting for the High Court. The price is sub-section (5)(b): he may not raise that question before the Appellate Tribunal, before the High Court under section 365 or the Supreme Court under section 367, or in a Special Leave Petition — and had the claim been rejected, sub-section (4) would have made the rejection final and beyond appeal or revision. When the High Court finally decides, that decision is applied and the disposing order amended to conform.
As a declaration in the prescribed form filed with the Assessing Officer or with the appellate authority — the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal — and then as their written order under sub-section (3) admitting or rejecting it. You meet it a second time at the end, in the amendment under sub-section (6) that brings your year into line with the decision in the other case.
he shall not raise such question of law in the relevant case before any appellate authority or in a subsequent appeal before a higher forum
See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.
All of them are in the Rules 2026 index.