← 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)

Manishkumar Ramlakhan Agrawal, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Ooficer, Ward 6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 920/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 271A(1)(d)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

satisfied with the assessee’s explanation. Ld. CIT(A) observed that there was no dispute regarding the non-compliance of statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) held that lack of coordination between the assessee and his AR cannot be accepted as a valid ... Asst. Year –2018-19 - 4– on record. It is not in dispute that the assessee failed to comply with two notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act. However, it has been explained by the counsel for the assessee that the non-compliance occurred solely due to the authorized

Dharmendrasinh Nirmalsinh Gohil, Bhavnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(9), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 825/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 70

issued on 29.03.2021 and subsequently notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 13.01.2022. Further, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 11.03.2022. Since the assessee has not filed any detail the Assessing Officer passed assessment order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad., Vejalpur vs. 7Nr Retail Limited, Navrangpura

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

ITA 674/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Aseem L Thakkar, AR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 251(1)(a)Section 68Section 69C

response, the assessee re-filed its return and submitted all details and supporting documents as required under notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act. The assessee submitted that its purchases and sales were genuine and he had proper documentation in support of the same, including bills and ledger

Bhavesh K Shah, Akota vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2)(1), Alkapuri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1188/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 249Section 249(3)Section 44A

issued upon the assessee, but the assessee failed to respond to the said notice. Thereafter, multiple notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued seeking details of the property, bank statements, investments, and sale of assets, however, the assessee did not furnish any replies or documents in response

Dhara Rakesh Sheth, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1186/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyaldhara Rakesh Sheth, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 9, Ashwini Apartment, Ward-7(1)(1), Tejendra Park, Ahmedabad. Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380013. [Pan : Bglps5238 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.08.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Jagdish Amrutlal Thakar, Patan, Gujarat vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward -3, Patan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1046/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

upon receipt of information that the assessee had made large cash deposits in his bank account. Despite several notices issued under sections 142(1), 133(6) of the Act and repeated reminders, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee failed to respond to either of the notices

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Endurance Technoligies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 506/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No 1

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak andFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Endurance Technologies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1663/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak andFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Endurance Technologies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1661/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak andFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR and
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Endurance Technologies Limited, Aurangabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1660/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No 1

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Arihant Jewellers, Pune vs. CIT (A)-6 Income Tax Office Ward 9 (1), Pune

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

ITA 1341/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND SHRI R

Brijlaxmi Paper Products Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 854/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 854/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Brijlaxmi Paper Products Pvt. Limited,……..Appellant 686, Shrachi Tower, Anandapur Em Byepass, Kolkata-700107 [Pan:Aafcb2003G] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,….....Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

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

Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee on 23.09.2019 and duly served upon the assessee electronically. Subsequently several statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Act along with query letters were issued to the assessee for furnishing the required information/documents/explanation with regard to ongoing assessment proceeding ... while some of the lenders even after getting reminder, have not complied with the notice. Thereafter the assessee was requested vide notice under section 142(1) to furnish its submission in respect of the discrepancies in the unsecured loan balance as on 31.03.2018 as per claim of assessee

Brijlaxmi Paper Products Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 827/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 827/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Brijlaxmi Paper Products Pvt. Limited,……..Appellant 686, Shrachi Tower, Anandapur Em Byepass, Kolkata-700107 [Pan:Aafcb2003G] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,….....Respondent Circle-5(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Sanjay Chatterjee, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

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

Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee on 23.09.2019 and duly served upon the assessee electronically. Subsequently several statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Act along with query letters were issued to the assessee for furnishing the required information/documents/explanation with regard to ongoing assessment proceeding ... while some of the lenders even after getting reminder, have not complied with the notice. Thereafter the assessee was requested vide notice under section 142(1) to furnish its submission in respect of the discrepancies in the unsecured loan balance as on 31.03.2018 as per claim of assessee

Neha Diwan, Hindmotor vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 630/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री प्रदीप

Ahizanath Mahfula, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward 32(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 568/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 568/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Ahizanath Mahfula,…………………………….…Appellant No.6 Flat No. 4A, 4Th Floor, Rutland Gate, 5Th Street, Thousand Lights Chennai-600006, Tamil Nadu [Pan:Blhpm3128E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………...…….Respondent Ward-32(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, 10B, Middleton Road, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Shri Suryanarayanan Sridhar, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Ms. Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(c)

bank account from the account of Duraiswamy Ramchandra Sekhara Reddy, and a notice under section 148 was issued on 29.03.2022. Thereafter notices under sections 142(1) on different dates were issued to the assessee and finally show cause notice under section 144 of the Act was issued to the assessee

Quantam Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., North Twenty Four Parganas vs. ITO, Ward 14(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 550/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 550/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Quantum Stock Broking Pvt. Limited,.………Appellant B.L. No. 10, Holding No. 11, Jagatdal, Dist. 24-Parganas (North)-743125, West Bengal [Pan:Aaacq0689E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-14(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Muskan Shetia, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 24, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

issued notice under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 for reopening the case on the report of Investigation Wing. Thereafter notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 24.11.2021 without issuance of statutory notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act and reasons ... reply dated 09.12.2021 sought reasons for reopening against the said notice u/s 142(1). The ld. Assessing Officer issued another notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 02.03.2022 and in compliance, the assesese submitted the supporting documents including bank statements with explanation of credit entries, loan confirmations

Srirampur Nityananda Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd., Tamluk, Purba Mednipur vs. I.T.O., Ward - 27(3), Haldia

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

ITA 496/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

Boutique De Fleur, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 45(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 446/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 446/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Boutique De Fleur,………………………………..Appellant Lawgical Consultants, 2D, Bentinck Street, Unit No. A, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aajfb1035D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-45(2), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 140Section 142(1)Section 249(2)Section 69A

assessee-firm deposited cash of Rs.13,18,000/- in its Kotak Mahindra Bank, Minto Park Branch. The assessee was requested vide notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 14.03.2018 to furnish a true and correct return of its income duly verified as per section ... format prescribed in Rule 12 of the Income Tax Rules on or before 31.03.2018. In response to notice under section 142(1), the assessee did not file its return of income. Thereafter notice under section 133(6) of the Act was sent to the Branch Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Minto

Vijay Kumar Agarwal (HUF), Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward 28(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 44/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 115BSection 142Section 142(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा

DCIT, Circle-1, Siliguri vs. Siliguri Jalpaiguri Development Authority, Siliguri

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1095/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 10(20)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा