← All Phrases

“Section 144(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 144Section 144(1)119 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 144(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 144(1)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
297 CTR 614 · 2017 · High Court
659
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution or default in appearance. Under Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits, even in an ex parte proceeding.

Tin Box Company v. CIT
249 ITR 216 · 2001 · Supreme Court
624
citing judgments

When an issue is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the AO must conduct a de novo examination and provide the assessee a full opportunity of being heard. The assessee is bound to comply with the notices issued by the AO.

ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon
321 ITR 362 · 2010 · Supreme Court
623
citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) within the statutory time limit is mandatory for completing an assessment under Section 143(3), and the failure to do so renders the assessment invalid. This defect is not curable under Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co.
46 ITR 144 · 1962 · Supreme Court
551
citing judgments

Income tax is levied only on real income that actually materializes, not on hypothetical or notional income, even if accounting entries suggest otherwise. If no income results, there is no tax liability.

Judgments citing Section 144(1)

Goldstone Infra, Rajendranagara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 8 (2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 570/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CA appeared for Sri A. SrinivasFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan
Section 115Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 69A

attention was drawn to para 4 of the assessment order, which is to the following effect : “4. In view of the provisions of Section 144(1)(b) of the Act, and for the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish the Income Tax Return

Pluralsight Llc, Utah vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 639/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144(1)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234BSection 24Section 9(1)(vi)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

Prem Chand Gupta, Alwar vs. ITO, Alwar

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

ITA 657/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 250

issued on 28.09.2018, 11.10.2018 and 22.10.2018 but the assessee did not comply with the notices issued. Thereafter a show cause notice under section 144(1) of the IT Act was issued on 05.11.2018 for reply by 12.11.2018. In compliance to the said show cause notice, representative of the assessee attended

The Indian Missionary Movement, Kawardha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Kawardha, Kawardha

In the result appeal for the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations

ITA 199/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 199/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year:2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay Jain & R.B. Doshi, CA’sFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 253(5)Section 69A

failure on the part of assessee has led the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment under (best judgment assessment) within the provision of section 144(1)(b), on the basis of available material in the form of bank statement of the assessee obtained by issuing notices

Dinesh Kumar, Kushalpura Bansa vs. ITO WD 7(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 531/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anoop BhatiyaFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144(1)Section 250Section 68

case for hearing on 12.11.2018 but again the assessee has not responded. Final opportunity was given to the assessee vide notice under section 144(1) of the IT Act, 1961 issued on 29.11.2018 fixing the case for hearing on 04.12.2018 which was served upon the assessee through registered post. Since

Defsys Solutions P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1818/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 156Section 271ASection 274

Officer/TPO to undertake fresh exercise of determining the arm’s length price, failure to pass draft assessment order would violate the provisions of section 144(1) of the Act. This is not a curable defect in terms of section 292 B of the Act.” 34. Considering the facts

Sibasankar Sahu, - Deogarh vs. PCIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.217/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Sibasankar Sahu, Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur Arnapurna Store, At: Bania Sahi, Po/Ps: Deogarh Dist-Deogarh-768108 Pan No. :Apeps 1706 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, Dated 18.03.2022, Passed In Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1041011837(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 199 Days. It Was The Submission That The Delay Was On Account Of Medical Treatment Of The Assessee’S Father & Assessee’S Wife. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In Trading Of Potatoes, Onion & Garlic In The Remote Area Of The District Of Deogarh, Odisha. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Was Not Well- Versed In Taxation Issues & On Account Of The Medical Treatment Of The 2 Assessee’S Father As Also The Assessee’S Wife, The Assessee Could Not File

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 144ASection 263Section 44A

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य

Girdhari Lal Meena, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

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

ITA 118/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Gogra (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

M/S. Atul Projects India P Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT- 9(1)(2) (Now Juridiction With Dc CC 2(4)), Mumbai

ITA 1940/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153CSection 37(1)Section 43CSection 69CSection 80I

provisions of Section 144 of the Act are special and exceptional which can only be invoked if any of the conditions specified in Section 144 (1) (a), (b) or (c) are satisfied. Section 144 of the Act reads as under : Section 144 (1) If any person - (a) fails to make ... only basis on which respondent no.l seeks to exercise power under Section 144 of the Act relying upon the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the Act. In view of the irrefutable fact that Section 144(1)(a) of the Act cannot apply since petitioner has filed a return

M/S. Atul Projects India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 9(1)(2), ( Now Juridiction With Dc CC-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 1880/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153CSection 37(1)Section 43CSection 69CSection 80I

provisions of Section 144 of the Act are special and exceptional which can only be invoked if any of the conditions specified in Section 144 (1) (a), (b) or (c) are satisfied. Section 144 of the Act reads as under : Section 144 (1) If any person - (a) fails to make ... only basis on which respondent no.l seeks to exercise power under Section 144 of the Act relying upon the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the Act. In view of the irrefutable fact that Section 144(1)(a) of the Act cannot apply since petitioner has filed a return

M/S. Atul Projects India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 9(1)(2), ( Now Juridiction With Dc CC-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 1879/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153CSection 37(1)Section 43CSection 69CSection 80I

provisions of Section 144 of the Act are special and exceptional which can only be invoked if any of the conditions specified in Section 144 (1) (a), (b) or (c) are satisfied. Section 144 of the Act reads as under : Section 144 (1) If any person - (a) fails to make ... only basis on which respondent no.l seeks to exercise power under Section 144 of the Act relying upon the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the Act. In view of the irrefutable fact that Section 144(1)(a) of the Act cannot apply since petitioner has filed a return

M/S. Atul Projects India Pvt Ltd., Mimbai vs. DCIT- 9(1)(2), ( Now Juridiction With Dc CC-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 1877/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153CSection 37(1)Section 43CSection 69CSection 80I

provisions of Section 144 of the Act are special and exceptional which can only be invoked if any of the conditions specified in Section 144 (1) (a), (b) or (c) are satisfied. Section 144 of the Act reads as under : Section 144 (1) If any person - (a) fails to make ... only basis on which respondent no.l seeks to exercise power under Section 144 of the Act relying upon the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the Act. In view of the irrefutable fact that Section 144(1)(a) of the Act cannot apply since petitioner has filed a return

M/S. Atul Projects India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 9(1)(2), ( Now Juridiction With Dc CC-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 1876/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153CSection 37(1)Section 43CSection 69CSection 80I

provisions of Section 144 of the Act are special and exceptional which can only be invoked if any of the conditions specified in Section 144 (1) (a), (b) or (c) are satisfied. Section 144 of the Act reads as under : Section 144 (1) If any person - (a) fails to make ... only basis on which respondent no.l seeks to exercise power under Section 144 of the Act relying upon the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the Act. In view of the irrefutable fact that Section 144(1)(a) of the Act cannot apply since petitioner has filed a return

Pacific Crest Pte Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT Circle-2(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 661/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115ASection 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 195Section 44BSection 44DSection 9(1)(vi)

Ultimately, the Assessing Officer issued a show- 2 | P a g e AY: 2012-13 cause notice to the assessee in terms of section 144(1)(b) of the Act calling upon the assessee to explain why the assessment should not be completed to the best of judgment under section

Amadoroco Limited, Nicosai Cyprus vs. ACIT, Int. Tax. 1(1)(1), New Delhi

ITA 784/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.784/Del/2020, A.Y. 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(3)

income or loss returned by the assessee, but there is variation in tax payable by the assessee. If you examine provisions of section 144(1) in light of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, there is no doubt with regard to fact that second condition is not satisfied

M/S. Bhagabati Buil & Construction Pvt. Ltd, Cuttack vs. Pr. CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 114/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. M/S. Bhagabati Bhagabati Build Build & & Vs. Pr. Cit, Constructions Pvt Ltd., At: Constructions Pvt Ltd., At: Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-1 Madhupatna, Po: Link Road, Madhupatna, Po: Link Road, Ps:Madhupatna, Cuttack Ps:Madhupatna, Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaecb 1801 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Ar Sandeep Kumar Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Pr. Cit, Cit, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar-1 Dated 27.11.2019 27.11.2019 In Appeal No.Itba/Ast/S/144/2019 Itba/Ast/S/144/2019-20/1021143134(1) For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year2017- 18. 2. Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri M.K.Gautam ,Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. M.K.Gautam ,Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 144Section 263

retains the character of an assessment order. Just because the word “or refundable to the assessee” have been deleted from the provisions of section 144(1) cannot be interpreted to hold that if an assessment is done u/s.144, no refund can be granted to the assessee. Under the Income

Sridevi Vuyyuru, Hyder vs. ITO Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

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

ITA 575/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)

short “the Act”). Assessee, however, did not file any return of income. Learned Assessing Officer, therefore, took up proceeding under section 144(1)(b) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceeding, on the basis of AIR information made available by the banks, pursuant to the notice issued under

Juniper Networks India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT.- CC- 2(4), Mumbai

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7412/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

passed under Section 92CA(3) of the Act. In the Draft Assessment Order, dated 15.12.2016, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer incorporated the aforesaid transfer pricing adjustments leading to the Appellant filing of objections before DRP which were rejected vide

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Ravi Goel, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2895/DEL/2011[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2021AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Madhumita Royआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A. No.2895/Del/2011 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year 1992-93 बनाम Acit Ravi Goel Circle 23(1), Room No. 190, Vs. Legal Heir Of C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Lt. Sh. S.P. Goel, New Delhi. S-347, Greater Kailash-Ii New Delhi. Pan No. Aagpg7134D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 144(1)

I.T.A.No.2895/Del/2011/A.Y. 199-93 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI