“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)

Panimayam Jesuraja, Pudukottai vs. ITO, Circle-2(1), Trichy

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

ITA 1318/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1317 & 1318/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16 Panimayam Jesuraja, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 55, Kallusanthu Aranthangi, Circle 2(1), Radhanallur B.O., Trichy/Tanjore. Pudukottai 614 616. [Pan:Auppj9253R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Hitesh, Advocate For Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit & Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 17.03.2025 & 19.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT &

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

against which, the assessee did not file return of income. 3 I.T.A. Nos.1317 & 1318/Chny/25 Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued various notices under section 142(1) of the Act, show-cause notice under section 144 of the Act, Central communication letter by NaFAC dated 10.04.2023 and show- cause notice under section

Panimayam Jesuraja, Pudukottai vs. ITO, Circle-2(1), Trichy

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

ITA 1317/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT &

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Govindarajan Allam Bala, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 1(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1272/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1272/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Govindarajan Allam Bala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No. 149, 2Nd Floor, Non Corporate Ward 1(2), Kodambakkam High Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aftpg2676Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 701 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 14.08.2018. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 06.08.2019 & 04.11.2019 were issued to the assessee calling for details. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee made cash deposits

Sivasubramaniam Banurekha, Cuddalore vs. ITO Ward 1, Cuddalore

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

ITA 1269/CHNY/2025[2015 - 2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1269/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sivasubramaniam Banurekha, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 81, Seetharam Nagar, Cuddalore Court Ward 1, Buildings S.O., Cuddalore 607 001. Cuddalore. [Pan:Bmkpb4558D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri J. Saravanan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. CIT

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. However, there was no response from the assessee. The Assessing Officer issued various notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated 20.10.2022, 17.11.2022 & 19.12.2022. The Assessing Officer also issued show-cause notices dated 06.01.2023 and 25.01.2023. However, there was no response from ... dated 30.03.2022. Further, the assessee has not at all furnished any details in response to the notices issued under section 142(1) of the 5 I.T.A. No.1269/Chny/25 Act dated 20.10.2022, 17.11.2022, 19.12.2022 and moreover, there was no compliance against the show-cause notices issued under section

Ramesh Mangilal, Kolathur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 10(3), Nungambakkam

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

ITA 1050/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1050/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ramesh Mangilal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 8, Ayyappa Nagar Extension, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Vinayagapuram, Kolathur, Chennai. Chennai 600 099. [Pan:Agvpr4889B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Arihanth Jain, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 3 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri Arihanth Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

however, there was no submission filed by the assessee in response to the above notice issued. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 16.11.2021 to the assessee along with detailed questionnaire and also issued notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated

C-2573 Dhamalerimuthur Paccs Ltd., Tirupattur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

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

ITA 1035/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1035/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 C-2573 Dhamalerimuthur Paccs Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 188/2, Dhamalerimuthur, Ward 1, Tirupattur, 635 853. Vellore. [Pan:Aabad1030D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jainendar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Raised 9 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Under 2

For Appellant: Shri Jainendar, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80P(2)(c)

complete scrutiny through CASS and notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 29.06.2021 was issued on the assessee. Various notices under section 142(1) of the Act as well as various show-cause notices were issued on the assessee. However, there was no response from the assessee ... been shown at ₹.48,91,127/-, but, however, no reply was furnished by the assessee to the specific query in the notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 25.10.2021. Thus, the Assessing Officer disallowed the unsecured loans from others for want of confirmation, genuineness, proof of identity

Incometax Officer, Thriuvallur vs. Gt60 Arungulam Primary Agri Cooperative Credit Society, Tiruttani

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

ITA 2781/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gt60 Arungulam Primary Agri Ward 1, Cooperative Credit Society, Tiruvallur. No. 1, Periya Theru, Thumbikulam Village, Thalavedu Post & Taluk, Tiruvallur 631 212. [Pan: Aabag2568F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 24 Days. The Ito, Ward 1, Tiruvallur Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate

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

Further, the assessee filed e-reply along with balance sheet, statement of affairs, bank statement, etc. in response to notice under section 142(1) of the Act. 3 I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/24 According to the Assessing officer, the assessee could not reconcile the amount of cash deposits and withdrawals with the information

Edenred Pte Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Int. Taxational 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 749/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailedenred Pte Ltd., C/O. Walker Chandiok & Co. Llp, 16Th Floor, Tower Lll, One International Center, S B Marg, Prabhadevi (West), ............... Appellant Mumbai-400013. Pan : Aacce8636P V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax – International Taxation -2(2)(1), Room No. 606, 6Th Floor, ……………… Respondent Kautilya Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Singh/Ms. Shivali Mhatre Revenue By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Singh/Ms. Shivali MhatreFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

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

return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the year under consideration, the assessee received the following receipts from companies, namely, Edenred (India) Private Ltd and Accentiv

Vir Alloys and Steel Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 11(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, with directions as aforesaid

ITA 2557/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Akhilesh Sindhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA

Jeevandeep Edumedia Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle CIT-6, Mumbai

In the result, the a In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stands allowed

ITA 2517/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd., Pr. Cit-6, 1St Floor, Sun Paradise Business 501,5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Plaza, Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Maharishi Karve Road, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcj 0180 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Parikh

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80G

information is/are 1. The following accounts or documents or information is/are 1. The following accounts or documents or information is/are sought under section 142(1) of the Income sought under section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961: tax Act, 1961: Jeevandeep Edumedia Pvt. Ltd. Jeevandeep Edumedia ... clearly demonstrates that a specific query was assessment record clearly demonstrates that a spe assessment record clearly demonstrates that a spe raised under Section 142(1) of the Act, vide notice dated raised under Section 142(1) of the Act, vide notice dated raised under Section 142(1

Vir Alloys and Steel Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 11(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, with directions as aforesaid

ITA 2489/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Akhilesh Sindhu

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA

Sbl Private Limited, Haridwar, Uttrakhand vs. PCIT (Central), Delhi-2, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2231/DEL/2024[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

books of account. The assessee on the other hand invites our attention to its paper book pages 1 to 19, Assessing Officer’s Section 142(1) show cause dated 22.4.2021 and its reply thereto dated 18.6.2021 qua the specific issue of exempt income and Section 14A disallowance. The same

Shri Devinder Parkash Vijay, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-44(5), Delhi

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 157 days in filing

ITA 2096/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250

filed any Income Tax Return under Section 139 of the Act. The case of assessee was identified as ‘non-filer’. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 03.02.2018. The assessee failed to file the Income Tax Return in compliance of notice under Section

Aparna Ashok Sapra, Mapusa vs. Income Tax Officer, Panaji

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

ITA 72/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.72/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) Aparna Ashok Sapra, Vs I T O Ward2(3), Pratik Motors, Aaykar Bhavan, . Aarkay Plaza, Edc, Patto, Duler, Panjim-403001. Mapusa-403507, Goa. Goa. Pan/Gir No.Akmps6554P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By None(Letter Dt15-07-2025) Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 16.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale ,Jm: The Assesse Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Delhi Passed U/Sec144 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Has Not Filed The Return Of Income.The Assessing Officer (Ao) Based On The Information Found That The Assesse Has Made Cash Deposits In The Bank Accounts In F.Y.2016-17 & Notice

Section 144

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

Abhay Hargovindbhai Patel, Jamnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 17/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 17/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Abhay Hargovindbhai Patel Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 305, Dwarkeshdham,B/H. Samudra 1(3), Jamnagar Sales, Rajnagar, Aerodram Road, 1St Floor, Taranjali Building, Pn Jamnagar 361006 Marg, Aubpp7196D Jamnagar 361008 (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/07/2025 आदेश / Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Vide Order Dated 08/11/2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Dated 26/11/2019, U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Page 1

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 120(5)Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

Ita no. 17/rjt/2024 Abhay Hargovindbhai Patel IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI

Madhya Pradesh Bhoj Open University, Bhopal vs. NFAC, Delhi

ITA 926/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Madhya Pradesh Bhoj Open University, Bhopal vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 925/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Varsha Jain, Jaipur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 240/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Ms. Prabha Rana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 249

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’’SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Jaipur, Highcourt Circle vs. Late Vandana Agarwal Through Legal Heir Sh. Nishit Agarwal, Jaipur

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

ITA 1237/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

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

Baljit Singh, Rupnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Ropar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 295/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 295/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Shri Baljit Singh, The Ito, Village Chalaki Tejpur, Ward 2(2), Vs Chamkaur Sahib, Ropar. Ropar (Punjab). "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Fhnps5198J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH