← 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)

Vivek Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1, Bharatpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 897/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Copy of notice notice issued under section 250 by CIT(A) fixing the date 24-27 06/06/2025 9. Reply to notices issued under section 142(1) 28-32 10. Bank statements 33-42 7. The ld. AR of the assessee in addition to the above written submission so filed vehemently

Kailash Chand Meena, Alwar vs. ITO Ward2(3), Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

found that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs. 10,60,000/- in his bank account with PNB. Notices under section 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued to the 6 Sh. Kailash Chand Meena, Alwar. assessee on 03.07.2019, 27.08.2019, 07.10.2019 but no reply received. Thereafter, in reply ... notice under section 142(1) issued on 13.11.2019, the ld. AR of the assessee filed required details including bank account statement. On 29.11.2019 the AO issued a Show Cause notice to the assessee to file his reply on the cash deposited by him of Rs. 10,60,000/- during demonetization

Hira, Dausa vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Dausa

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

ITA 34/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ghanshyam Meena, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234Section 69A

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

Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd., Raebareli vs. ITO-, Raebareli

ITA 75/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144

CBDT in Operation Clean Money. The ld. AO noted that the assessee had not filed a return therefore, a notice under section 142(1) was issued. Since, no compliance was made, a show cause notice under section 144 of the Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee ... then ld. AO. Subsequently, the file was transferred to the ITO-1, Raibareli, who issued another notice under section 142(1), followed by a notice under section 144. It was only after a final show cause notice under section 144 was issued on 14.11.2019 that the assessee filed a reply

Precious Bjuildtech Private Limited, Bareilly vs. PCIT, Bareilly

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

ITA 66/LKW/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.66/Lkw/2022 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Precious Buildtech Pvt Ltd V. Pcit Harmony Apartment, Adiacent Income Tax Department, To Bedi International School, Bareilly-243001. Dental College Road, Pilibhit Bypass Road, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aagcp1255R अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Mazhar Akram, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24 07 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 30 09 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mazhar Akram, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW श्री कुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष

Rajesh Balvantrai Brahmbhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT(Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1160/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, andFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

regarding the sale of land bearing Survey Nos. 430/4, 430/2, 430/3/1, and 429 situated at Makarba, Ahmedabad. In this regard, a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was already issued by the Learned Assessing Officer, and the appellant has duly submitted a detailed explanation and supporting documents ... relied on by the Ld. PCIT are inapplicable, as the appellant's case involves distinct facts and thorough inquiries by the AO under Section 142(1). Therefore, the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C and the approval us 153D are neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue. In contrast

Rajesh Balvantrai Brahmbhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT(Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1159/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, andFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

regarding the sale of land bearing Survey Nos. 430/4, 430/2, 430/3/1, and 429 situated at Makarba, Ahmedabad. In this regard, a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was already issued by the Learned Assessing Officer, and the appellant has duly submitted a detailed explanation and supporting documents ... relied on by the Ld. PCIT are inapplicable, as the appellant's case involves distinct facts and thorough inquiries by the AO under Section 142(1). Therefore, the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C and the approval us 153D are neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue. In contrast

Rajesh Balvantrai Brahmbhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT(Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1158/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

regarding the sale of land bearing Survey Nos. 430/4, 430/2, 430/3/1, and 429 situated at Makarba, Ahmedabad. In this regard, a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was already issued by the Learned Assessing Officer, and the appellant has duly submitted a detailed explanation and supporting documents ... relied on by the Ld. PCIT are inapplicable, as the appellant's case involves distinct facts and thorough inquiries by the AO under Section 142(1). Therefore, the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C and the approval us 153D are neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue. In contrast

Rajesh Balvantrai Brahmbhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT(Central), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1157/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

regarding the sale of land bearing Survey Nos. 430/4, 430/2, 430/3/1, and 429 situated at Makarba, Ahmedabad. In this regard, a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was already issued by the Learned Assessing Officer, and the appellant has duly submitted a detailed explanation and supporting documents ... relied on by the Ld. PCIT are inapplicable, as the appellant's case involves distinct facts and thorough inquiries by the AO under Section 142(1). Therefore, the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C and the approval us 153D are neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the Revenue. In contrast

Late Ashvinbhai Umedbhai Patel (Deceased) by Legal Heir Smit Ashvinbhai Patel, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Nadiad

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

ITA 1106/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2011-12
Section 271(1)Section 271CSection 69Section 69A

under section 147 of the Income-tax Act (the “Act”) by issuing notice under section 148 on 28.03.2018. Despite repeated notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaires, the assessee did not comply. In the absence of any explanation, the Assessing Officer proceeded ex parte under

Late Ashvinbhai Umedbhai Patel (Deceased) by Legal Heir Smit Ashvinbhai Patel, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Nadiad

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

ITA 1105/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2011-12
Section 271(1)Section 271CSection 69Section 69A

under section 147 of the Income-tax Act (the “Act”) by issuing notice under section 148 on 28.03.2018. Despite repeated notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaires, the assessee did not comply. In the absence of any explanation, the Assessing Officer proceeded ex parte under

Gordhandas Narandas Vaishnav, Iqbalgadh vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Palanpur

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

ITA 2075/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-2019 Gordhandas Narandas Vaishnav The Ito, Ward-1 40, 1St Floor, Apmc Iqbalgadh Vs. Palanpur. Prop: Gn Traders Iqbalgadh 385 135 Pa: Akwpv 8111 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr.DR
Section 114Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 43B

comparison to the Audit Report.” Consequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 22.09.2019, followed by multiple notices under section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire on different dates including 04.11.2020, 02.12.2020, 19.12.2020, 01.01.2021, and 18.01.2021. 2.3 During the course of assessment proceedings ... assessee, in response to the notices issued under section 142(1), furnished certain documents through the ITBA portal on 08.02.2021 and explained that he was engaged in the trading of agricultural commodities, mainly castor seeds and guwar seeds, purchasing the same from farmers and selling them to millers, apart from

Manisha Dhananjay Holkar, Nashik vs. Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1204/PUN/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016
For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Dreams Belle Vue, Pune vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Pune

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

ITA 1158/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1157 & 1158/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2014-15 Dreams Belle Vue, 3Rd Floor, City Mall, University Road, Ganeshkind, Maharashtra-411007, Pan: Aaaad9013B अपीलार्थी / Appellant Assessee By : Department By : Date Of Hearing : Date Of Pronouncement : Ito, Ward-2(1), Pune Vs. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Shri Kishor B Phadke Shri Vidya Ratan Kishore 01-09-2025 30-09-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Above Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Two Separate Orders Dated 15.02.2024 & 23.02.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)"] Pertaining To Assessment Years (“Ays”) 2016-17 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since Common Issues Are Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. 2. There Is A Delay Of 383 & 375 Days Respectively In Filing Of These Appeals Before The Tribunal For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Along With Application Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. On Perusal Of The Same, We Are Satisfied That The Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional Or Deliberate But Has Occurred For The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit. After Hearing Both The Sides, We Are Of The View That The Delay Is Attributable To The Sufficient Cause. We, Therefore, In Light Of The Decisions Of The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 Itr 471 (Sc) & In The Case Of Inder Singh Vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Reported In 2025 Livelaw (Sc) 339, Condone The Said Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal. 2

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Dreams Belle Vue, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2 (1), Pune

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

ITA 1157/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1157 & 1158/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2014-15 Dreams Belle Vue, 3Rd Floor, City Mall, University Road, Ganeshkind, Maharashtra-411007, Pan: Aaaad9013B अपीलार्थी / Appellant Assessee By : Department By : Date Of Hearing : Date Of Pronouncement : Ito, Ward-2(1), Pune Vs. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Shri Kishor B Phadke Shri Vidya Ratan Kishore 01-09-2025 30-09-2025 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Above Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Two Separate Orders Dated 15.02.2024 & 23.02.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)"] Pertaining To Assessment Years (“Ays”) 2016-17 & 2014-15 Respectively. Since Common Issues Are Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. 2. There Is A Delay Of 383 & 375 Days Respectively In Filing Of These Appeals Before The Tribunal For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Along With Application Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. On Perusal Of The Same, We Are Satisfied That The Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional Or Deliberate But Has Occurred For The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit. After Hearing Both The Sides, We Are Of The View That The Delay Is Attributable To The Sufficient Cause. We, Therefore, In Light Of The Decisions Of The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 Itr 471 (Sc) & In The Case Of Inder Singh Vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Reported In 2025 Livelaw (Sc) 339, Condone The Said Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal. 2

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Ashok Somnath Sonawane, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1) Nashik, Nashik Maharashtra

ITA 2154/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2154/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ashok Somnath Sonawane, Ito, Ward-2(1), Nashik Tara Kutir Bunglow, Mahatma Nagar, Nashik-422005 Vs. Pan : Alops7734A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suhas Vadulekar (Virtual) Department By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 23-07-2025 Date Of 30-09-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Vadulekar (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 54BSection 63

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD

Ch Marthanda Rao & Co, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward - 14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

ITA 966/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 69A

deposits in bank accounts: Rs. 60,00,000/-. As the assessee firm did not comply with the notices issued by the A.O under sections 142(1) and 144 of the Act, and neither furnished any documents or explanations, therefore, he was constrained to treat the aforementioned receipts/income as having been

Ch Marthanda Rao and Co, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward - 14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the order passed by the CIT(A) is modified in terms of our aforesaid observations, and the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our afore...

ITA 962/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 69A

deposits in bank accounts: Rs. 60,00,000/-. As the assessee firm did not comply with the notices issued by the A.O under sections 142(1) and 144 of the Act, and neither furnished any documents or explanations, therefore, he was constrained to treat the aforementioned receipts/income as having been

Kalpana Veera Reddy, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 931/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘SM’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक

Vidyavathi Paluru, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

ITA 554/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘SM’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक