“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)

Shri Basaveshwar Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Mudalagi vs. The Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli

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

ITA 78/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.78/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2020-21) Shri Basaveshwar Urban Vs. Pr.Cit, Co_Op Credit Society C.R.Building, Mudalagi, Navanagar, Belagavi-591312, Hubli-580025, Karnataka Karnataka. Pan .No.Aaaas6800M (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Saidappa Gadadi.Ar Revenue By Shri.Captain Pradeep Arya.Cit.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 11.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 14.08.2025 Pronouncement Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit) Hubli Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Revision Order Passed By The Pr.Cit Set Aside The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is A Cooperative Credit Society & Has Filed The Return Of Income For The A.Y 2020-21 On 04.01.2021 Disclosing A Total Income Of

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M/S Shaan Mercadores, Goa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Panaji, Goa

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

ITA 131/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.131/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2017-18 ) Shaan Mercadores, Vs. I T O Ward1(4), Shop.No.S-8, Aaykar Bhavan, T.R. Mansion, Edc, Patto, St.Inez, Panjim-403001. Panaji-403001, Goa. Goa. Pan .No.Acbfs2744Q (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Umiyaji Steel Industries, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot

The appeal is DISMISSED

ITA 183/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot14 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Diesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DIESH MOHAN SINHA

Shankar Ramkumar Mundra, Surat vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 78/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsex Stil ¥./Ita No. 78/Srt/2025 (Ay 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Shankar Ramkumar Mundra Income Tax Officer, 901, Samruddhi Apartment, Nr. Aarq | Ward-2(3)(6) Surat Terapanth Bhavan, City Light Road, | Yc Bhaarthana, Surat-395 007 [Pan : Agkpm 9150 F]

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 44ASection 68

aIHT ates sfearor, Ya AAS, Yet IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA

Grk Constructions, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 416/VIZ/2025[2014-25]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2025AY 2014-25

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 415 & 416/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15) Grk Constructions, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Visakhapatnam. Income Tax, Pan: Aakfg0840N Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 14/08/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल

Grk Constructions, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 415/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Gulipalli Satish, Bobbili vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vizianagaram

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

ITA 413/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 413/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gulipalli Satish, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bobbili. Ward-1, Pan: Cbnpg3883K Vizianagaram. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 14/08/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

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

Madhavarao Yarrakula, Tenali vs. ITO, Ward I, Tenali

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

ITA 244/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 244/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Madhavarao Yarrakula, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tenali. Ward-1, Pan: Akxyp5376N Tenali. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Dl Narasimha Rao, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 14/08/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri DL Narasimha RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

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

Pawan Mechu, Chirawa vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Jaipur

ITA 74/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 69

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y

Puran Chand, Vill.Barso vs. Income Tax Officer WD-1, Bharatpur

ITA 188/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH : JAIPUR BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.188/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year

Pawan Mechu, Jhunjhunu vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Jaipur

ITA 1458/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: CIT(A).

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 69

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Goenka Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is also dismissed

ITA 402/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalito, Ward 2(1), Jaipur ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Adv. (thro. VH), Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR

Section 10ASection 127Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 72Section 74

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Guru Kripa Associates, Bareilly vs. Pr. CIT, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 97/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 263

I.T.A. No.97/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH 'A', LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT

Jsiw Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 621/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyaljsiw Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Vs. 4, Asra Mitra Estate, Commissioner Of B/H Jupiter Mill, Income Tax-1, Dudheswar Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380004. [Pan :Aabcj8501 F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Parin Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Rp Rastogi, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri RP Rastogi, CIT. DR

Section 142(1)Section 263Section 37

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

Amitkumar Navnitbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 984/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.984/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Amitkumar Navnitbhai Patel The Acit बनाम/ A/1-1, Madhav Apartment Circle 2(1)(1) V/S. Opp. Municipal Garden Ahmedabad – 380 015 Vasna Ahmedabad – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Amppp 5605 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.F. Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

then Assessing Officer. In response, the assessee, through his then counsel, sought adjournment vide letter dated 31.08.2018. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) dated 11.08.2018 was also complied with vide submission dated 12.09.2018, wherein complete details and explanation regarding cash deposits and sale of property were furnished. In support ... through the assessee’s earlier counsel. The learned AR pointed out that thereafter, due to change in incumbent Assessing Officer, fresh notices under section 142(1) read with section 129 of the Act were issued, nearly a year after earlier compliance. Amitkumar Navnitbhai Patel vs. ACIT Asst. Year

Mahesh Padmnabhrao Kashikar, Nanded vs. ITO Ward-1, Nanded

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

ITA 1472/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Ramesh N. TheteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

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

Mahesh Padmnabhrao Kashikar, Nanded vs. ITO, Ward-1, Nanaded, Nanded

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

ITA 1471/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Ramesh N. TheteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

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

Manatec Electronics Private Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 83/CHNY/2025[2018-9]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.83/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Manatec Electronics Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Limited, 19A, Abinav Kailash, Corporate Ward 4(1), Velachery Road, Little Mount, Chennai. Saidapet, Chennai 600 015. [Pan:Aafcm1685D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A. & Ms. Ranjini, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.11.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. As Per Concise Grounds Of Appeal, Ground Nos. 1 & 2 Raised By The Assessee Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

For Appellant: Ms. Sandhyaarthi, C.A. &For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 35Section 37Section 37(1)

assessee was selected for complete scrutiny and the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act on 22.09.2019. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued on 22.02.2021. According to the Assessing Officer the assessee claimed revenue expenditure

Alegowda Nagesh, Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 546/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED

Antony Paul, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1151/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Narayana Murthy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT

Section 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL