← All Phrases

“Section 142(1)(i)”

Section References (mined)Section 142Section 142(1)(i)27 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 142(1)(i) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 142(1)(i)

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.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

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.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

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. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

Judgments citing Section 142(1)(i)

M/S Mumbadevi Veyhicles, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(4)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7899/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarm/S. Mumbadevi Ito Ward 41(4)(2), Veyhicles Room No. 854B, 8Th Shop No. 18, Suyash Vs. Floor, Kautilya Shopping Centre, Nnp, A. Bhavan, Bkc, K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon Bandra (East), (E), Mumbai-400 065 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaofm0851F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Dinkle Hariya & Ms. Sruti Kalyanikar, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) was issued. The proceedings were thereafter transferred to the Faceless Assessment Scheme and notices under section 142(1) were issued calling for details such as nature of business, bank statements, Form 26AS, partnership deed, audit report in Forms 3CB and 3CD and other relevant ... deeming fiction in cases where a person fails, without reasonable cause, to furnish a return within the prescribed time and no notice under section 142(1)(i) or section 148 has been issued within such period, and the Assessing Officer is satisfied that such person has taxable income. However, even

Boda Ramasatyanarayana, Draksharamam vs. Income Tax Officer, Kakinada

ITA 532/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69A

held with Andhra Bank, Branch: Draksharamam of Rs.16,35,000/-, but had not filed his return of income, issued notice under section 142(1)(i) of the Act dated 29.01.2018 and called upon him to file his return of income for the subject year. However, the assessee failed to comply ... income as required by the mandate of section 139(1) of the Act nor complied with the notices issued by the A.O under section 142(1) of the Act, which, thus, had resulted into framing of an ex-parte assessment by the A.O vide his order passed under section

Hushn Jahan, Amethi vs. Income Tax Officer Amethi, Amethi

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

ITA 68/ALLD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Hushn Jahan V. The Income Tax Officer Palpur Raebareli Road Amethi Jagdishpur, Musfirkhana Amethi (U.P) Tan/Pan:Autpj9095P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69A

that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. The Income Tax Department issued notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to prepare a true and correct return of income for the year ... upholding the ex-parte order as valid, even though same was not valid in law, owing to the reason that: (i) Notice under section 142(1) should be issued by ld. Assessing officer as laid down under section 142(1)(i); (ii) Such a notice under section 142(1

Sarvesh Kumar, Farrukhabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(2) Farrukhabad, Farrukhabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 452/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Sarvesh Kumar, Vs. Ito, Okharu Khanpur, Ward-4(2)(2), Farrukhabad, Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad Ho 209601 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dsqpk3348G Assessee By : Shri Swaran Singh, Ca Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44A

before the due dates varying between 30th June, 1991 and 21st October, 1991. They were not filed. The Assessing Officer issued notices under section 142(1)() of the Income-tax Act in all these cases on 26-5-1902. The assessees did not file any return in pursuance thereof. Another ... notice under section 142(1)() on 20-5-1993. The assessees flied returns on 22-12-1993. These returns were treated as invalid returns by the Assessing Officer as they were filed beyond one year from the end of the assessment year, i. e. 31-3 1991. The assessments were

Iqbal Shaik, Nellore vs. ITO., Ward International Taxation, Nellore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 67/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Kranthi Palivela And CA, MrudulathaFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 127Section 129Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

assessee has not filed his return of income and further, the case was flagged by the System on issue on notice under section 142-(1)(i) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 13.02.2018 calling the assessee to furnish true ... file the same on or before 150.03.2018. The assessee did not file his return of income in response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Therefore, show cause notice dated 24.09.2019 was issued and called-upon the assessee to file his submissions on or before

Chandra Bosu Babu Ramesh Yangala, Gudivada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudivada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 214/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.214/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Chandra Bosu Babu Ramesh Yangala Asst. City Planner Gudiwada, Andhra Pradesh Gudivada Municipality Gudivada – 521301 Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Acspy1662Q] (अपीलधर्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri K. Siva Rama Kumar, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

Section 144Section 250

Face, HDFC Bank, Rajahmundry and Axis Bank, Koramangala amounting to Rs. 10,00,000/- during the demonetization period. Notice dated 13.03.2018 under section 142(1)(i) of the Act was issued to the assessee calling for return of income. Since the assessee did not file any return of income till ... also obtained information from the banks as per the provisions of section 133(6) of the Act. In response to the notice under section 142(1)(i) of the Act, assessee filed explanation for the sources of cash deposits made during the demonetization period by stating that

Jahangir Syed, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 646/HYD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)(i)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 45

following substantial question of law. “Whether the return filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated u/s 139(1)/139(4) or Section 142(1)/148 can be held as non-est in the eyes of law and has invalidated for the purpose of deciding exemption ... held, that the “return of income” filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated under Section 139(1) or Section 139(4) or Section 142(1) 16 ITA No.646/Hyd/2023 Jahangir Syed, Hyderabad. or Section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon provided further proceedings in relation to such assessment

Mohammed Fasiulla Sharif, Bengaluru vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 288/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. Phani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 44ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL

Pammi Jaiswal, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer-33(2)/Kolkata, Kolkata

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

ITA 2415/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2415/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Pammi Jaiswal,………………….………..………Appellant 75/B, 4Th Floor, Uttar Panchanangram Mart, Vip Nagar, W.B. Pin Code No. 700100 [Pan:Bcnpj3281N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-33(2), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri Debesh Poddar, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 25, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 26, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 147Section 148Section 271ASection 68

section 148 was issued and duly served upon the assessee. The assessee failed to file her return under section 148. Accordingly notice under section 142(1) was issued and duly served on the assessee calling for the basic details of the case for the purpose of verification of the return ... accounts. Return under section 148 of the Act was not filed by the assessee in compliance. Thereafter notice under section 142(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee, but there was no reply/response from the side of assessee. Thereafter show-cause notice was issued mentioning

Harda Nagar Bal Vikas Samiti Harda, Sarswati Shishu Mandir vs. ITO-1, Harda, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in

ITA 419/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10Section 115BSection 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69A

were admittedly filed after the dates prescribed under sections 139(1) and 139(4) or in the notices issued under section 142(1) and section 148, the returns were indeed non-est and could not have been acted upon by the Assessing Officer even though they were filed before

Eramalloor Service Co-Perative Bank Ltds No.1175, Cherthala vs. ITO, Ward-1, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 820/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.C.A.Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 250Section 80A(5)Section 80P

bank account maintained with district co-operative banks during the demonetization period and no return of income is filed by it, notice under section 142(1)(i) of the Act was issued to the assessee directing it to file the return of income. However, the assessee failed to furnish ... under section 139, on or before 31/03/2018, and also failed to furnish the return of income in response to the notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) proceeded to complete the assessment to the best of his judgment on the basis of material

Slm Hsg49 Thiruchengodu Taluk Co-Op Housing Society Ltd., Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1, Thiruchengode

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

ITA 2134/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 69Section 69ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH: CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT

Rambabu Angadala, Gudivada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudivada

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

ITA 241/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.241/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rambabu Angadala, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 7-12/C, Veleru, Veeravalli Ward-1, Bapulapadu, Krishna-521110, Gudivada. Andhra Pradesh-521110. Pan: Brwpa7640C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 23/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीयअिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम SMC पीठ, िवशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल

Gammon-Spscpl Jv, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3403/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2017-18 Gammon- Spscpl Jv Assistant Commissioner Gammon House, Of Income Tax, Circle Veer Savarkar Marg, 22(1) Prabhadevi S.O., Piramal Chamber, Mumbai- 400025. Vs. Lal Baug, Pan: Aacag3293N Parel, Mumbai- 400012. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Nayana Krishnakumar- Sr. A.R
Section 142(1)(i)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 145Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH

Ravi Kumar Enantala, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(4), Vijayawada

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

ITA 168/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.168/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Ravikumar Enantala, Vs. Income Tax Officer, D.No. 74-1-22/1, Ward-2(4), Yrl Complex, Mg Road, Vijayawada. Patamata, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh – 520007. Pan: Aadpe9027C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 23/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 271ASection 69A

आयकर अपीलीयअिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम SMC पीठ, िवशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM SMC BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल

Venkatachalapthi Varaganti, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 684/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.684/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Venkatachalapthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Varaganti Ward 9(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adypv8964H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Chakradhar, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A Chakradhar, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, DR
Section 142(1)(i)Section 69A

ITA No 684 of 2024 Venkatachalapathi Varaganti आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Neha Singh, Lucknow vs. ITO-3(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 23/LKW/2024[217-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow18 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69D

dated 06-06-2019, without containing any DIN, had issued a show cause notice citing an earlier notice dated 13-03-2018 under section 142(1)(i) stating the same to have been served on this appellant on 15-12-2017. The ITO-3(2) was replied

Mr. Aditya Kumar, Lucknow vs. ITO-1(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 22/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa.Y. 2017-18 Mr. Aditya Kumar, Vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), 1, Anora, Amausi, Lucknow Lucknow-226008 Pan Bfapok 7298L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Siddharth Kohli, Advocate Respondent By Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2024 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 45Section 50CSection 69Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2017-18 Mr

Smt. Aruna, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 537/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sukruth N. Segu, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 144CSection 44ASection 68

ITA No.537/Bang/2024 Smt. Aruna, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Ramya Vadlamudi, Gudiwada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gudiwada

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

ITA 72/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.72/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Ramya Vadlamudi Vs. Income Tax Officer 10-154, Opp. E-Seva Ward-2 Rajendra Nagar Gudiwada Gudiwada, Krishna Dist. [Pan : Ajnpv4972A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम “SMC” पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी