“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)

Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1371/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1371/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Dineshbhai Mulachandabhai Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(1), बनाम/ Patel Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Vs. Patidar Faliyu, Bhestan Gam, Gate, Surat-395 001 Choryasi, Surat- 395 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Bispp 4863 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri P.M. Jagasheth, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 29/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Harshadbhai Maganbhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(3)(2), Surat

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

ITA 111/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.111/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Harshadbhai Maganbhai Patel Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3)(2), बनाम/ C-1007, Pratisha Tower, Surat, Anavil Business Center, Vs. Sarela Wadi, Ghod-Dod Road, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat- 395 007 Surat-395 007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adgpp 3387 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 24/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Ganesh Puranchand Agrawal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 575/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleganesh Puranchand Agrawal, 120, Chikli Layout, Kalamna Marketroad, ……………. Appellant Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Pan – Afypa6620B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4(1), ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Abhishek Kumar.Ar Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing – 17/10/2025 Date Of Order –17/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri.Abhishek Kumar.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 147Section 234ASection 234FSection 271ASection 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ganesh Puranchand Agrawal, 120

Hivtap Nirmulan Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Yavatmal vs. ITO Ward-1, Yavatmal

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

ITA 571/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalehivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit T.B. Karyalayapandharkawada Road, ……………. Appellant Yavatmal -445 001, Maharashtra. Pan–Aabah6751K V/S Income Tax Officer, ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 249(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Hivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari

Jaisingh Krushnarao Chavhan, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4, Aaykar Bhavan Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 562/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalejaishingh Krushnarao Chavhan, 95, Butibori Industrial Area,Tiwari, Nagpur 440 002, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan -Adopc8820B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaishingh Krushnarao Chavhan, 95

Shri Chakradhar Swamy Mahila Gramin Bigarsheti Patpurwtha Sahkari Santha, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(5), Nagpur

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

ITA 558/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadaleshri Chakradhar Swamy Mahila Graminbigarshetipatpurwthasahakari Sanstha 1St Floor, Chimurkar Apartment ……………. Appellant Wardha Road, Chinchbhavan Nagpur 440025. Maharashtra, Pan–Aajas6767L V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–1(5), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: None(Letter Dt 14.10.2025) Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: None(Letter Dt 14.10.2025)For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 147Section 23Section 234ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Chakradhar Swamy Mahila GraminBigarshetiPatpurwthaSahakari

Ashutosh Deshpande, Nagpur vs. ACIT/DCIT Circle -5, Nagpur

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

ITA 493/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleashutosh Sudhakar Deshpande, Plot No.5, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur 440 010, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan–Aavpd0098E V/S Acit Circle–5, ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440006, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Ashutosh Sudhakar Despande. Revenue By : Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Ashutosh Sudhakar DespandeFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 251(1)(a)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ashutosh sudhakar Deshpande, Plot

Vijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, Nagpur vs. Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4 Nagpur, Nagpur

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

ITA 183/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, 46, Middle Ring Road, East Wardhaman Nagar, ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440008, Maharashtra. Pan–Abrpj7368Q V/S A.C.I T. Circle–4, ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.K.P. Dewani, A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.K.P. Dewani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, 46

No H 1043 Bhujabalapatnam Primary Agriculture Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudiwada

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

ITA 426/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal. The Petitioner/Appellant Society Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, Wherein It Was Submitted That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Was Sent To The Email Of Its Then Ar, Ca B.V. Rao, Instead Of Its Email "Krishnapacs085@Gmail.Com," As Had Been Requested By It. The Appellant Society Came To Know Of The Order Only When Itd Officials Called Upon It To Pay The Tax Arrears. It Further Submitted That, Due To The Above Circumstances Beyond Its Control & Prayed That The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal May Please Be Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & That The Appeal Be Decided On Merits.

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80P(2)(a)

Rs.57,49,000/- in bank account held with Krishna District 4 Central Cooperative Bank, Kaikaluru during the demonetization period. A notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, dated 24-11- 2017, was issued and served on the assessee, calling for the return of income. However, the assessee ... assessee reiterated its submissions and argued that it has furnished a valid return of income in response to the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, although belatedly, but before the assessment was completed, claiming deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act, but the A.O., without

Smt. Suraiya Begum, Kanpur vs. ITO Ward-1(3)(4), Kanpur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 682/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

last paragraph, i.e., paragraph 4 in the above said letter, specifically lays down that the process of service of notice under section 142(1) of the Act should be completed by 31.12.2017. A perusal of the assessment order itself shows that the notice under section 142(1 ... case of the present assessee was issued on 09.03.2018 and, therefore, undisputedly, the statutory notice under section 142(1) of the Act has been issued beyond the date prescribed and, as such, the Instruction of the Department being binding on the Revenue Authorities, the issuance of notice beyond the prescribed

Smt. Suraiya Begum, Kanpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(4), Kanpur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 681/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

JCIT(OSD), CC-1, Lko, Lucknow vs. Acp Tollways Private Limited, Lucknow

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

ITA 131/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 32

I.T.A. No.131/Lkw/2024 C.O.No.14/Lkw/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

Shri Bhupendra Kumar Agarwal, Lucknow vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-III, Lucknow

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

ITA 122/LKW/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Range-3 V. Shri Bhupendra Kumar 27/2, Raja Ram Mohan Rai Agarwal Marg, P.K. Complex, Lucknow- Bhagwati Industrial 226001. Compound, Mohibullapur, Lucknow-226020. Tan/Pan:Adppa9782P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Bhupendra Kumar V. Acit Range-Iii Agarwal Lucknow-226010. Bhagwati Industrial Compound, Mohibullapur, Lucknow- 226020. Tan/Pan: Adppa9782P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Suyash Agarwal, Adv Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 02 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17 10 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suyash Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

DCIT, Range-3, Lucknow vs. Shri Bhupendra Kumar Agarwal, Lucknow

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

ITA 410/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Suyash Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Shri Vinay Pratap Singh, Lucknow vs. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

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

ITA 688/LKW/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Swarn Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

deposits and withdrawals. In view of the above facts, a satisfaction was recorded under section 153C of the Act and a notice under section 142(1) was issued upon the assessee asking him to file a return of income. After further notices, the assessee filed a return of income ... that even though the assessment in this year was under the provisions of section 143(3), after the issue of the notice under section 142(1) (since it was the search year), the issue of that notice under section 142(1) could also be done only after recording of satisfaction

Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, Petlad vs. I.T.O Ward 1(3)(1), Petlad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 474/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

issuing notice under section 148 dated 27.03.2018, duly served upon the assessee. Despite several statutory notices and reminders, including notices issued under sections 142(1), 271(1)(b), and final show-cause notice dated 02.11.2018, the assessee failed to file any return of income or furnish any details or explanation

Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, Petlad vs. I.T.O Ward 1(3)(1), Petlad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 473/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Spandana Sphoorty Financial Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle 3(2), Hyderabad

ITA 821/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 69A

05/03/2019, which provides for the SOP for handling of cases related to substantial cash deposit during the demonetization period, where the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act has not been complied with by the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR based on his aforesaid contention states that

Chandra Sekhar Ravula, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-5(1), Hyderabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1099/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 1099/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Chandra Sekhar Ravula, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-5(1), Hyderabad. Pan: Agkpr5081N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

section 148 of the Act, dated 30/03/2021 nor was coming forth with the requisite details as were called for vide notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act, therefore, issued a show cause notice (SCN) under section 144 of the Act wherein the assessee was called upon to explain

Slr Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 544/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263

verified the issue of sub-contract payments made to the above two parties by issuing a specific show cause notice under Section 142(1), dated 09-01-2020, where the A.O. has called for specific details of sub-contract payments made by the assessee and consequent TDS deduction under Section ... under Section 143(3) read with Section 143(3A) and 143(3B) on 09-04-2021, and relevant notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act on various dates, submitted that the case was selected for scrutiny to verify the genuineness of the expenditure which covers sub-contract expenditure