“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)

Sri Gaurav Palriwal, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Ranchi

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 46/RAN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayit(Ss)A No. 10 & 11/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2012-13 & 2013-14) Sri Vishal Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Ishatvam, Flat No. 801, 8Th Floor, Central Circle-1 Vs. Kanke Road, Ranchi-834008. Ranchi. Pan No. Ahnpp 0913 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 12/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2012-13) Sri Gaurav Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Flat No. 701, 7Th Floor, Ishatvam, Central Circle-1 Vs. Behind Kanke Petrol Pump, Kanke Ranchi. Road, Ranchi-834008. Pan No. Aiapp 8110 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 13/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Sri Saurav Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Block No. 1, Flat No. 3C, Space Town Central Circle-1 Vs. Vip Road, Raghunathpur, Kolkata. Ranchi. Pan No. Atcpp 9277 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 14/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Smt. Priti Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Flat No. 701, 7Th Floor, Ishatvam, Central Circle-1 Vs. Behind Kanke Petrol Pump, Kanke Ranchi. Road, Ranchi-834008. Pan No. Amdpp 5673 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 15/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Smt. Renu Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Block No. 1, Flat No. 3C, Space Town Central Circle-1 Vs. Vip Road, Raghunathpur, Ranchi. Kolkata-700052 Pan No. Ajlpp 9129 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 148Section 151Section 153A

original return. Accordingly, IT(SS)A No. 10/Ran/2023 Shri Vishal Palriwal Vs ACIT & Ors 14 appeals statutory notices were issued under Section 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act determining total income

Smt Priti Palriwal, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Ranchi

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 45/RAN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Section 148Section 151Section 153A

Sri Vishal Palriwal, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-3(2), Ranchi

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 44/RAN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Section 148Section 151Section 153A

Shri Mudasir Ahmad Shaksaz, Pulwama vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Anantnag

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

ITA 590/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 590/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Shri Ayoub Naik, Kulgam vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Anantnag

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

ITA 174/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

Shri Manzoor Ahmed Bhat, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 599/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: None

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

Manjuben Natvarbhai Patel L/H of Natvarbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel, Bardoli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bardoli

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

ITA 317/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Dwarampudi Krss Subbireddy L/R of Dwarampudi Ramakrishna Reddy, East Godavari Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kakinada

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 219/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

with State Bank of India, Branch: Gollalamamidada, but had not filed his return of income for the subject year, issued a notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, calling upon him to furnish his return of income. 3. In reply, Smt. Dwarampudi Bullamma, widow of late Shri Dwarampudi Ramakrishna

Pankaj Dodwani, Indore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 373/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

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

Section 147Section 2Section 263

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Pankaj Dodwani, Indore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Indore

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 363/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

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

Section 147Section 2Section 263

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Ashok Parwal, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 53/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 53/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Circle-04, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Ashok Parwal M-57, Mahesh Colony, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ACJPO7256L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निधारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Vedant Agarwal, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT (th. V.C.) सुनवाई क

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT (th. V.C.)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

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

Ravindra Sonajirao Kshirsagar, Beed vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

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

ITA 159/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.159/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Respondent: Assessee by Smt Deepa Khare

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.159/PUN/2025

Parlapalli Karunakar Reddy, Tirupati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Tirupati

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

ITA 667/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, E. Phalguna KumarFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Tours5 Com, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

ITA 632/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ए’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Tours5 Com, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

ITA 630/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

Shaik Mahaboob Basha, Anantapur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hindupur

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

ITA 150/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Ms. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Waseem UR Rehman, Sr

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ए’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ SM-A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री

Biprajit Deb, Coochbehar vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Coochbehar

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 442/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the end of relevant assessment year no Notice u/s 142(1) could have been issued by the A.O. calling for the return of income as per the provision of Sec. 142(1)(1) of the Act.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 250Section 251(1)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH”, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A

Navodaya, Haripada Sahitya Mandir, Purulia vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Asansol

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

ITA 404/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathannavodaya, Haripada Sahitya Vs Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol Mandir, East Lake Road, Purulia, W.B. Pan No. :Aabtn 5764 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Kamaluddin, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.01.2025, Passed By The Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Nashik, For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri S.K.Kamaluddin, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mrinmay Basak, Ld. Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Had Not Filed Its Return Of Income. It Was The Submission That There Was No Monetary Requirement Of The Assessee To File Return Of Income Insofar As The Proviso To Section 10(23C) Of The Act Was Amended To Make It Compulsory For Filing Of Return Of Income Only From The Assessment Year 2023-2024. It Was The Submission That The Assessing Officer Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Exemption U/S.10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act On The Ground That The Assessee Had Not Filed Its Return Of Income. Ld. Ar Also Relied Upon The Decision Of The Itat Indore Bench Of The Tribunal In The Case Of Harda Nagar Bal Vikas

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Kamaluddin, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 142(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,“एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन

ITO, Bkc vs. V.D. Pop & Display LLP, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2458/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Tejas Sodha, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha P. Kaushik (Sr. DR)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69C

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE Ms. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. CIT(Exemptions) Circle 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2404/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed & Shri Ayush Chhajed, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT D/R

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 253(5)Section 263

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON