“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)

Bibha Pandey, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 50(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1580/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1580/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Bibha Pandey,……………………………………..Appellant Ad-146, Salt Lake, Sector-1, Kolkata-700064, West Bengal [Pan:Ajvpp3199B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…...Respondent Ward-50(3), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Manicktala Civil Centre, Uttarapan Complex, Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700067 Appearances By: Shri Anuj Moshadi, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

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

through CASS. A notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued and duly served upon the assessee. Thereafter a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued and served on the assessee. In response to the said notices, the assessee has filed her submissions

M/S.Mahogany Logistics Services Pvt. Ltd., Madurai vs. PCIT, Madurai-1

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

ITA 1631/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1631/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Mahogany Logistics Services Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax-1, 10, Jawahar Road, Chokkikulam, Madurai. Madurai 625 002. [Pan:Aafcd8781R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Madurai Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company [Earlier Known As M/S. Drsr Logistics Services Private Limited] Filed Its Return Of Income For The Ay 2018-19 Claiming Loss Of ₹.31,28,98,436/- Under 2

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT

Section 139(9)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 263Section 36Section 37Section 40

detailed note along with documentary evidence in relation to the assets held by the company was provided in response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. The assessee also provided all the details regarding mode of payment in respect of issue of NCDs and investments ... Logistics Services and commercial expediency in investment in the subsidiaries 6 I.T.A. No.1631/Chny/24 were furnished vide submission in response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Likewise, the details regarding secured loan availed from KKR India Financial Services P. Ltd., such as, PAN/address of the lender, dates

Income Tax Officer 7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Palmon Impex Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 2939/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanpalmon Impex Pvt. Ltd. Ito-7(3)(1), 9, Janata Indudstries Compound, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 162, S. B. Marg, Lower Parel (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaecm3977F

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H (SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Palmon Impex Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer- 7(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are

ITA 2561/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H (SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Portescap India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 6749/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 92C(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (ACCOUNTANT

Anuj Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(1), Bulandshahr

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 363/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 363/Del/2025 (A.Y 2021-22) Anuj Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer, Mugalpura-2, Khurja, Ward 2(3) (1) Bulandshahr-203131 U.P. Bulandshahr, U.P. (Jao), C/O. M/S Raj Kumar & Asstt. Unit (Nfac) (Asstt. Associates, L-7(Lgf), South Frmad By Nfac) Extension, Part-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Bfrpk7137P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Raj Kumar, Ca & Shri Suraj, Adv Revenue By Ms.Poojaswaroop, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2025

Section 142(1)

1 Anuj Kumar Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [DELHI BENCH: “ B” New Delhi] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH

Nisha Data Com Limited, Rourkela vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 Rourkela, Rourkela

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

ITA 174/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कटक पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्चुअल कोटु] [Virtual

Nisha Data Com Limited, Rourkela vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3 Rourkela, Rourkela

In the result, both the appeals filed for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-

ITA 173/CTK/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133BSection 144Section 250Section 40

Incometax Officer, Bhimavaram vs. Prasad Raju Penmatsa, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 33/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.517/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Penmatsa Prasad Raju D.No. 7-7-25/3 Income Tax Office Kodavalli Road, Fci Colony Aayakar Bhavan Bhimavaram – 534201 Jp Road, Sivaraopet Andhra Pradesh Bhimavaram – 534201 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aqcpp6707B] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.33/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23) Vs. Penmatsa Prasad Raju Income Tax Officer D.No. 7-7-25/3 Income Tax Office Kodavalli Road, Fci Colony Aayakar Bhavan Bhimavaram – 534201 Opp. Ganesh Canteen Andhra Pradesh Jp Road, Sivaraopet Bhimavaram – 534202 [Pan:Aqcpp6707B] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

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

case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 01.06.2023 and notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on various dates. In response to the notices, assessee submitted part information. Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short

Babu Rao Sahukari, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (5), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 327/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.327/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Babu Rao Sahukari Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(5) 24-107-54/1 Visakhapatnam – 530020 C/O. Srikar Sai Medical Agencies Andhra Pradesh Gonthivanipalem Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam – 530026 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Efnps1341E] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri M. Muralidhar, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

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

specified date. Ld. AO as detailed in Page No. 2 of the assessment order has provided multiple opportunities by way of notice under section 142(1) of the Act and show-cause notice under section 144 of the Act. Assessee failed to respond to any of the notices. Since there

Nimmagadda Muralidhar, Nidadavole vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Tanuku

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 188/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.188/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Nimmagadda Muralidhar D.No. 3-123 Income Tax Office Samisragudem Village Aayakar Bhavan Near Zph High School Sajjapuram, Tanuku – 534211 Nidadavole Mandal Andhra Pradesh West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Anbpn7016M] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparnavilluri, Sr. Ar

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

return of income admitting an income of Rs.5,15,530/-. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Act and notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee calling for details. In response, assessee submitted his reply vide letter 12.12.2023. Considering the submissions

Penmatsa Prasad Raju, Bhimavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 517/VIZ/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

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

Ganesh Transports, Vijayawada vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 480/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 479/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 480/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Assessee has not responded to the notice under section 148 of the Act nor filed return of income as required. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on various dates. Assessee failed to comply with any of the notices issued under section 142(1

Ganesh Transports, Vijayawada vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 479/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Teejay India Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 340/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.340/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) & S.A. No. 15/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Teejay India Private Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. 15, Brandix, Apsez, Income Tax, Pudimadaka Road, Atchutapuram Circle-5(1), Mandal, Visakhapatnam-530011. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaaco9452H (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री धिजयपाल राि, उपाध्यक्ष

Bala Venkata Shiva Satya Naga Raju Mantena, Kalla Mandalam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 174/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Bala Venkata Shiva Satya Naga Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Raju Mantena Bhimavaram 2-272/3, Malavani Thippa West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh Kaluvapudi – 534236 Kalla Mandalam West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aocpm1009D] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 147Section 148

after obtaining necessary approval from the competent authorities. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2021. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued electronically on 16.11.2021, 11.01.2022 and 17.02.2022 requiring the assessee to furnish the detail with reference to the reasons recorded

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 820/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

notice Assessment year 1997-98 - Pursuant to a notice under section 148, assessee filed its return - Thereafter Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 142(1) and completed assessment estimating income of assessee from business by applying provisions of section 145 - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) did not adjudicate issue

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 819/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 818/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commssioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 817/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147