“Section 142(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 142Section 142(1)15,051 judgments

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

Leading authorities on Section 142(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.

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)

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4251/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sri Prem Properties Private Limited, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4248/DEL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S

Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4207/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Income Tax Officer, Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4206/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Income Tax Officer, Faridabad vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Private Limited, Faridabad

ITA 4205/DEL/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Ganga Bishan, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2179/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

2179/Del./2025 Ganga Bishan notice under section 143(2) upon the assessee on 22.09.2019 followed by issue of notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 23.11.2020. The Ld. AO completed the assessment on 22.01.2021 under section 143(3) r.w. section ... case of the assessee. 6.1 Elaborating the above contentions, the Ld. AR pointed out that in notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 23.11.2020 (copy at Paper Book page 1-2), the Ld. AO required the assessee to furnish documentary evidence in support of claim that the amount

Singla Apparels Private Limited, Gandhi Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5163/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito House No.17, Street No.2, Ward Shankar Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, C.R. Building, Ito Krishan Nagar, Delhi-110051. I.P.Estate Pan-Aajcs3628L New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2017-18] Singla Apparels Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito 7244, Mahavir Gali Ward Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-1100531. C.R. Building, Ito Pan-Aajcs3628L I.P.Estate New Delhi-110002 Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. & Shri Utkarsa Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dt.11.06.2024 & 12.08.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-8/10554/2019-20 & In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10058210 Respectively, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Penalty

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 156Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

ITA Nos.3445 & 5163/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL

Singla Apparels Pvt Ltd, Gandhi Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3445/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 156Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

ITA Nos.3445 & 5163/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL

Shri Sajid Bashir Khan, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Srinagar

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

ITA 302/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sajid Bashir Khan, Iqbalabad Vs. Ito, Ward (1), Bemina Srinagar, Jammu & Srinagar. Kashmir. [Pan:-Bxxpk6247E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone Ca Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 210Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 282Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Shadi Lal Tickoo, Sarkanligund, Anantnag vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC Delhi

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

ITA 318/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 318/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shadi Lal Tickoo, Sarkanligund, Vs. Ito, Ward, Anangnag, Jammu & Kashmir. Anantnag. [Pan:-Akvpt6447K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bilaspur vs. Baldev Prasad Patel, Mungli

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

ITA 646/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Raipur14 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.646/Rpr/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sharma & Shri VivekFor Respondent: Ms. Manisha Kinnu, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE

Sanjay Kumar Shukla, Patna vs. Dc/Ac, Circle-6, Patna

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

ITA 269/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vipin Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT

Section 115Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

Deposit and taxed U/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. For that from perusal of records it appears that notice under section 142(1) of the IT Act was issued which was never served to the appellant nor it has came to his knowledge. 4. For that assessing ... account were properly accounted for. The treatment of cash deposit during the demonstration as unexplained cash was incorrect. Further, the notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act was never served upon the appellant nor has it come to his knowledge. The assessment order is ex parte in which

Niravkumar Desai, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 549/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Assessing Officer. Therefore The Ld. A.O. Added Entire Amount Of Rs.94,08,163/- As The Income Of The Assessee.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 50C(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (HYBRID HEARING) Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri

Sri Tirumala Estates and Farmlands, Visakhapatnam vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 552/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

file any return of income in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. Subsequently, a notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, dated 15.11.2021 was issued, calling for relevant information, but there was no response from the assessee. Therefore, the A.O. completed the assessment

Sri Tirumala Estates and Farmlands, Visakhapatnam vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 551/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Visakhapatnam vs. Quality Steel Shoppe Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the Cross Objection No

ITA 454/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Viz/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Quality Steel Shoppe Ward-2(1), Private Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaacq1115D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 18/Viz/2024 (In आ.अपी.सं /454/Viz/2024) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

assessment order is held to be invalid as it is pending for e-verification. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act in response to which the assessee company filed its replies. On being queried, as to why the purchases

M/S B Krishnakumar, Mavelikara vs. Ward 1 & Tps, Thiruvalla

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

ITA 677/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Years: 2017-18 B. Krishna Kumar .......... Appellant Makamkuzhy, Kallimel P.O., Mavelikara [Pan: Aapfm9503R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1 & Tps, Thiruvalla ....... Respondent Assessee By: Smt. Lakshmi N., Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 31.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Petroleum Products. The Return Of Income For Ay 20170-18 Was Filed On 31.03.2018 Disclosing Income Of Rs. 1,83,110/-. No Assessment Was Made Against The Said Return Of Income. Subsequently, Based On The Information That The Appellant Firm Made Cash Deposits Amounting To Rs. 2,55,19,294/- In The Bank Account Maintained With State Bank Of India During The Previous

For Appellant: Smt. Lakshmi N., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Years: 2017-18 B. Krishna

Kulathumkuzhiyil Muhammed Ashraf, Kottayam vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Kottayam, Kottayam

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

ITA 622/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Years: 2018-19 Kulathumkuzhiyil Muhammed Ashraf .......... Appellant Kulathumkuzhiyil, Velloor, Kottayam 686501 [Pan: Bzvpa6849J] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-2, Kottayam .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Prashanth Srinivas, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 23.06.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual. No Regular Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Act Was Filed For Ay 2018-19. Based On The Information That The Appellant Received Interest Income From United India Insurance Company Ltd. Or Rs. 29,03,429/- During The Previous Year Relevant To Assessment Year Under Consideration, The Ao Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax. Accordingly, A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Issued On 2 Kulathumkuzhiyil Muhammed Ashraf 31.03.2022. The Appellant Neither Complied With The Notice U/S. 148 Nor U/S. 142(1) Of The Act Issued By The Ao Calling For Certain Information. In The Circumstances, The Ao Was Constrained To Pass Best Judgement Assessment By Bringing To Tax The Interest Income Of Rs. 29,03,429/- As Unexplained Money Of The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM Assessment Years: 2018-19 Kulathumkuzhiyil Muhammed

Maratha Seva Sangh Sanchlit Dhule Dist Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd, Dhule vs. Assessment Unit, Itd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2183/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2183/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Maratha Seva Sangh Sanchlit V Assessment Unit, Dhule Dist Nagari Sahakari S Itd. Patsanstha Ltd., Plot No.148, Chudamani, Jay Hind Colony, Deopur Dhule, Dhule – 424002. Pan: Aactm4087D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sharad A Shah Revenue By Shri Pawan Bharti (Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 13/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 23.07.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act, Dated 21.02.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA

Alicon Castalloy Ltd, Pune vs. PCIT, -1, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1377/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1377/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Alicon Castalloy Ltd., V The Pr.Commissioner Of Gat No.1426, Village S Income Tax-1, Pune. Shikrapur, Taluka Shirur, Pune – 412208. Pan: Aabcp0252B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S Pathak Revenue By Shri Aditya Shukla – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pune-1, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.03.2025 For Assessment Year 2020-21 Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Dated 20.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1] The Learned Pr.C1T Erred In Revising The Asst, Order Passed U/S

Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”ए” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL