← 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)

DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Navnirman Co Op. Bank Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1974/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1974/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Dcit Navnirman Co-Op. Bank Ltd. बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(1) Navnirman Bhawan V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Opp. Hdfc Bank Ahmedabad City Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabfn 2975 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hem Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/05/2025

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “सी“, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ C ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

Ushasree Bandaru, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 529/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.528/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyasree Kamineni Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan :Adopk6338C] Circle-5(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.529/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ushasree Bandaru Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan :Acepb2973M] Circle-5(1) Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.C.Devdas, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/05/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 21/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: These Two Appeals Filed By The Two Related Assessees Are Directed Against Two Separate Orders Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (“Ld.Pcit”) Both Dated 26.03.2024 Passed U/S 263 The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2016-17. Identical Grounds Have Been Raised By Both The Assessees. The Grounds Raised In The Ita No.528/Hyd/2024 Are Reproduced As Under :

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Satyasree Kamineni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 528/HYD/2024[A.Y.2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.528/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyasree Kamineni Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan :Adopk6338C] Circle-5(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.529/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ushasree Bandaru Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan :Acepb2973M] Circle-5(1) Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.C.Devdas, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 01/05/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 21/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: These Two Appeals Filed By The Two Related Assessees Are Directed Against Two Separate Orders Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (“Ld.Pcit”) Both Dated 26.03.2024 Passed U/S 263 The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2016-17. Identical Grounds Have Been Raised By Both The Assessees. The Grounds Raised In The Ita No.528/Hyd/2024 Are Reproduced As Under :

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Kakoli Ganguly, Legal Heir of Haradhan Halder, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 314/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.314/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Kakoli Ganguly, Legal Heir Of Haradhan Halder.…………… ….……….Appellant 33, Banamanli Naskar Road, Kolkata – 700060. [Pan: Adypg8773F] Vs. Ito, Ward-12(1), Kolkata……………....................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Gaurav Mathur, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Archana Gupta, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 20, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 25.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Such Delay Explaining Reasons For The Delay. We, After Perusing The Petition Made In The Application, Satisfy That There Were Bona Fide & Sufficient Reasons For Such Delay. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay & Admit This Appeal For Adjudication.

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy

Ganesh Srinivasan, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 2005/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeganesh Srinivasan Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income- 10, Fair Field, 112, Road No.4, Tax-8, Mumbai Room No.611, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 Pan : Aagps5047M Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, Sr.Counsel (virtually)For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule -CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH

Dharmendra Vadilal Parmar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, -32(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the legal grounds raised by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 3603/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri. P. D. Chougule, SR. DR
Section 111ASection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM Dharmendra

Shah Hasan, Uttar Pradesh vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 798/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.798/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2012-13) Shah Hasan, 157, Mushtarak Miranpur, Jansath, Uttar Pradesh 251315 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Airph-7471-F बनाम Vs. National Faceless Appeal Center, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Delhi 110001 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 20/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against An Ex-Parte Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 19.10.2023, For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 408 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Seeking Condonation Of Delay In Filing Of Appeal Supported By An Affidavit. After Perusing The Application For Condonation Of Delay, I Am Satisfied That Delay In Filing Of Present Appeal Is Un-Intentional & Was For The Reasons Stated In The Application

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Sabita Gupta, Bahadurgarh vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 2897/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Ms. Mansi Jain & Ms Sakshi Rustogi, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “जी”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एम. बालागणेश, लेखाकार सद" के सम" IN

Radial International Mining Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Pr, CIT (Central), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1651/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 22Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH

Mr. Tasavver Husain, Farrukhabad vs. ACIT, Farrukhabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 96/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 270A

Dairy Milk Booth No. 751 at Pocket ET-F, NandNagri, Delhi-110093, which was allotted to him under Defence Quota, therefore, notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.01.2018(P.B. No.4) and notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated ... Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad, which was duly reflected in the return of income e-filed vide e-filing Acknowledgement No. 172358431240919(P.B. No.7-54) Notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.01.2018 required the assessee to file Return of income till 16.02.2018. Moreover, since the assessee was retired

Mr. Tasavver Husain, Farrukhabad vs. ACIT, Farrukhabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 270A

Dairy Milk Booth No. 751 at Pocket ET-F, NandNagri, Delhi-110093, which was allotted to him under Defence Quota, therefore, notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.01.2018(P.B. No.4) and notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated ... Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad, which was duly reflected in the return of income e-filed vide e-filing Acknowledgement No. 172358431240919(P.B. No.7-54) Notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.01.2018 required the assessee to file Return of income till 16.02.2018. Moreover, since the assessee was retired

Saurashtra Gramin Bank, Rajkot vs. Assistat Commissioner of Income Tax NFAC, National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 183/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 May 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Ms. A.D. Vyas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(viia)

response to the notice, under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed the return of income. Subsequently, a notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued to the assessee on 7th March 2022, calling for various details, including detailed submission on the issues, on which ... case is reopened. In response to notice under section 142(1), the assessee filed written submission, on 11th March 2022, before the assessing officer which are reproduced by the assessing officer in his assessment order page No.4 to 5. 5.After due verification of the details filed by the assessee

Thrissur District Police Co Operative Society Ltd, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thrissur

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

ITA 409/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R
Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

ITA Nos.408 & 409/Coch/2024 Thrissur District Police Cooperative Society Ltd., Thrissur IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH:COCHIN BEFORE

Thrissur District Police Co Operative Society Ltd, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thrissur

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

ITA 408/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R
Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

ITA Nos.408 & 409/Coch/2024 Thrissur District Police Cooperative Society Ltd., Thrissur IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH:COCHIN BEFORE

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Purulia vs. Ladhurka C S Shop, Purulia

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 749/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Sruti Datta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sallongyaden, DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

Prasanth Sunil Kumar Bohra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 6725/Mum/2024 is allowed

ITA 2303/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 274Section 69

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Prasanth Sunil Kumar Bohra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 6725/Mum/2024 is allowed

ITA 2302/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 274Section 69

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Shravan Singh Parmar, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Thane

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

ITA 6611/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDAPRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Smitha V. Nair, CIT(DR)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)Section 69A

this manner, the assessee also earns interest income from its customers. During the year under consideration, pursuant to a notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act on 3 the basis of the information that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.12,24,500/- in his bank account maintained

Deputy Commissioner of Income, Circle-1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Vikas Deep Sales Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5869/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘F’ BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Sarvjeet Kaur, Noida vs. ITO, Ward- 3(3), Noida

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1176/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.1176/िद"ी/2025(िन.व. 2011-12) Smt. Sarvjeet Kaur, W/O Baldev Singh, B-209, Greater Noida, Gamma-1, Rampur Jagir, District Gautam Budhh Nagar, Up 201306 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Akhpk-5536-A बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Noida, Up 201301 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Ghaziabad, Up 201002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Chaman Singh, Chartered Accountant "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against An Ex-Prate Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 30.12.2024, For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Shri Chaman Singh, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submits That This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against An Ex-Parte Order Passed By Cit(A). He Further Submitted That Even The Assessment Order Was Passed U/S. 144 Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Chaman Singh, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL