← All Phrases

“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)

Mridul Shashikant Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. PCIT(Central)-1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 3645/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

response to notice under section 153C, the assessee declared similar income as declared originally. During assessment, the assessing officer issued notice under section 142(1) dated 08.12.2022, copy of such notice is placed on record at page no. 18 to 22. In response to such notice, the assessee filed ... with relevant information are placed on record at page no. 23 to 26 of paper book. The assessing officer further issued notice under section 142(1) with annexure dated 10.01.2023. In the show cause notice, the ld. AO raised question about the documents seized at the time of search

Mridul Shashikant Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. PCIT Central -1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 3644/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 254(1)Section 263

response to notice under section 153C, the assessee declared similar income as declared originally. During assessment, the assessing officer issued notice under section 142(1) dated 08.12.2022, copy of such notice is placed on record at page no. 18 to 22. In response to such notice, the assessee filed ... with relevant information are placed on record at page no. 23 to 26 of paper book. The assessing officer further issued notice under section 142(1) with annexure dated 10.01.2023. In the show cause notice, the ld. AO raised question about the documents seized at the time of search

Pushkar Vishwas, Bulandshahr vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3), Bulandshahr

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 5661/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singha.Yr. : 2011-12 Pushkar Vishwas, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca Vaibhav Goel, Ward 3(3), Bulandshahr, 75, Navyug Market, Uttar Pradesh 1St Floor, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Aezpv4597E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vaibhav Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH,VICE PRESIDENT A.YR. : 2011-12

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Azad Coach Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6006/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145Section 145(3)Section 250

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

Khurshid Ahmad Dar, Jammu and Kashmir, India vs. ITO Ward, Udhampur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 236/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Blekhurshid Ahmad Dar Vs. Ito, Ward, Nully Poshwari Turkawangam, Udhampur Shopia, 192305, Jammu & Kashmir, India.Pin 192305. Pan No. Awmpd5664K Assessee By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Itp. Revenue By Mrs. Roshanta Kumari Meena, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025. Date Of Pronouncement To. [1 .2025. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH (PHYSICAL), AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. MITHA LALMEENA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Rameez Raja Bhat, Bugam Batapora Chadoora Budgam vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2 Srinagar, Silk Factory Road Rajbagh Srinagar

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

ITA 198/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Written submission)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH

Shri Shailender Vaid, Jammu vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jammu

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

ITA 118/ASR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income- Shailender Vaid, Vs. House No. 179-P, Sector-3, Tax, Circle-L, Jammu (J&K) Trikuta Nagar, Jammu (J & K) Pan No. Aawpv6431C Assessee By Shri Joginder Singh, Ca Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025. Ft . // .2025. Date Of Pronouncement

Section 124Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH (PHYSICAL), AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. MITHA LALMEENA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

The Brahmaling Multipurpose Co-Operative Society Limited, Belagaum vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 295/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. Nos.295/PAN/2025

Shri Basaveswar Co-Op Credit Society Niyamit, Palabhavi Raibag, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward, Belagavi

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

ITA 218/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 218/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2017-18) Shri Basaveswar Co_Op Credit Vs Ito-Ward-4, Society Niyamit, Feroj Khimjibhai Cpx, . Near Gram Panchayat , Civil Hospital Road Main Road, Belagavi-590001. Palabhavi, Raibag, Karnataka. Belgaum-591235.Karnataka. Pan .No.Aagas9132A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Ms.Shree Raksha.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 04.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 10.11.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-3 Chennai Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Nfac/ Cit(A) Sustaining Addition U/Sec68 Of The Act & The Denial Of Claim Of Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Act Applying The Provisions Of Section 80Ac Of The Act. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is A Credit Cooperative Society Engaged In Providing The Credit Facilities To Members. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Based On The Information & Data Analytics/ Cash Transactions Data

Section 80ASection 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. Nos

Shri Hargovind Ishwarbhai Patel, Surat vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Surat

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

ITA 21/SRT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Buayananda Pruseth

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BUAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sajithkumar Subi, Ankleshwar vs. Income-Tax Officer Ward-2(4), Bharuch

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

ITA 670/SRT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.670/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (Hybrid Hearing) Sajithkumar Subi, Ito Ward- 2(4), Bharuch बनाम/ 60, Raghuveer Society, Opp. Harikunj Building, Above Bank Of Vs. Surwadi, Bor Bhatha Road, Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch Ankleshwar, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Axcpk0947P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Ms. Kinjal Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2025

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat vs. Kishan Baranwal, Surat

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

ITA 214/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.214/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Shri Kishan Baranwal Circle – 2(1)(1), 217, 2Nd Floor, Aryaman Arcade, Surat Bhagal, Surat- 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bjkpb0758E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Chandanath Irshad, Thrissur vs. ITO, Ward-1&Tps, Guruvayoor

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 631/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Years: 2015-16 Chandanth Irshad .......... Appellant Irshad Agencies, Chandanth, Andathode Thrissur 679564 [Pan: Aefpi2931B] Vs. Ito, Ward -1 & Tps, Guruvayoor .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Narayanan P. Potty, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.11.2025 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 11.07.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual & Proprietor Of The Firm Irshal Agencies Carrying On The Business Of Trading In Cattle Feed. No Regular Return Of Income For Ay 2015- 16 Was Filed By The Appellant. Subsequently, The Ao, Based On The Information Available In The Aims Module Of Itba That The Appellant Had Deposited Cash In Sb Account Aggregating To Rs. 1,43,41,285/-, Formed An Opinion That Income Escaped Assessment To 2 Chandanth Irshad Tax. Accordingly, A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Was Issued On 31.03.2021. In Response To The Notice U/S. 148, The Appellant Filed The Return Of Income On 09.08.2021 Declaring Income Of Rs. 2,34,600/-. The Appellant Had Not Furnished The Information Sought By The Assessing Authority In Response To The Notice Issued U/S. 142(1) Of The Act. In The Circumstances, The Ao Treated The Entire Cash Deposits As Business Turnover Of The Appellant & Estimated The Income At 8%. Accordingly, He Made Addition Of Rs. 9,15,532/-.

For Appellant: Shri Narayanan P. Potty, AdvocateFor 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: 2015-16 Chandanth Irshad

Tara Devi Choudhary, Nagaur vs. DCIT CC-1 Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 845/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. Rushabh Mehta, CA (ThroFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

aa aritcite aferpenr, TAGE =arails, TAGE IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR So Va. Mateeth, =r

Anju Meel, Jaipur vs. I.T.O. Ward 3(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 741/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Chaudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292B

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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain, Kota

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

ITA 717/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 68Section 69B

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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar vs. Ashok Sharma, Rewari

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1227/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 145B(1)Section 28Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, "B" JAIPUR डॉ. एस.सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Rico Auto Industries Limited, Ludhiana vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 703/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.703/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) M/S Rico Auto Industries Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 बनाम/ B-26, Focal Point Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Vs. Ludhiana (Punjab)-141010 Ludhiana (Punjab) - 141001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-8724-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) (Virtual) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. In These Twin Appeals, The Assessee Assails Proposed Revision Of The Assessment Order By Revisionary Authority U/S 263 For Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2021-22. Facts Are Stated To Be Identical In Both The Years. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2020-21 Wherein The Assessee Challenges Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) (Virtual) – Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Rico Auto Industries Limited, Ludhiana vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 702/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.703/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) M/S Rico Auto Industries Ltd. Pr. Cit-1 बनाम/ B-26, Focal Point Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Vs. Ludhiana (Punjab)-141010 Ludhiana (Punjab) - 141001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-8724-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) (Virtual) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. In These Twin Appeals, The Assessee Assails Proposed Revision Of The Assessment Order By Revisionary Authority U/S 263 For Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2021-22. Facts Are Stated To Be Identical In Both The Years. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2020-21 Wherein The Assessee Challenges Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) (Virtual) – Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT

Rekha Ajit Chaudhari, Pune vs. Ward 3(3), Pune

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

ITA 2069/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2069/Pun/2025 Assessment Year 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL