← 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)

Assotech Moonshine Urban Developers P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2524/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 263

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Ld. AR, drawing our attention to the question No. 09 to the notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act [ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2021- 22/1035600625(1) dated 15/09/2021], submitted that the AO had specifically called the working of disallowance of expenditure

Pratik Shah, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bhilai, Durg

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 224/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. /Ita No. 224/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Sethia, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)Section 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधर", "या"यक

Haresh Mohanlal Patel, Rajkot vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Rajkot

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed, in about terms

ITA 725/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 May 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

ITA No.725/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 17-18 Haresh M Patel IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN

Pramodbhai Nanubhai Ahir, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli, Surat

In the result, the appeal filed the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 818/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (HYBRID HEARING) Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri

Wellfare Resorts and Farms Pvt Ltd, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 408/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnanआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.408/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Welfare Resorts & Farms Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax, Circle 5 (1) Seethamadara A.P Visakhapatnam Pan:Aaacw4839L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 09/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16/03/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. There Is A Delay Of 127 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Also Supported By An Affidavit Of The Managing Director

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

ITA No 408 of 2024 Welfare Resorts and Farms P Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ IN THE

Saharayn Universal Multipurpose Society Limited, Bhopal vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 425/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT

Kalu Ram Saini, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 222/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 May 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 69A

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

Dropti Devi, Behror vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Alawar, Alwar

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

ITA 1223/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 May 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250

through registered post. In response to the notice under section 148, the assessee did not file her return of income, therefore, notice under section 142(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was issued. In compliance, the assessee filed her return of income on 31.08.2018 declaring total income

Hiralkumari Anupkumar Arora, Anand, Gujarat vs. ITO Ward 3, Anand, Gujarat

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

ITA 159/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D Shah, AR. &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Asudani, SR-DR
Section 127Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

following grounds have been taken in this appeal: - ITA No.159/Ahd/2025 [Hiralkumari Anupkumar Arora vs. ITO] - 4 – “1. That the notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act and all the subsequent proceeding including transfer of case without passing order under section

Amit Kiritbhai Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 603/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Amit Kiritbhai Mehta The Ito, Ward-2(1)(2) 272, Krishna, Manekbaug Society Vejalpur Ambawadi, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad Pan: Agapm 0534 H (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By Revenue By : Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

bank accounts maintained by the assessee with Vijaya Bank. The assessee failed to comply with notices issued under section 142(1) and did not file any return of income. Consequently, the AO framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and added the entire credits under section

Dhirubhai Rajabhai Koladiya, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1009/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Kanchan Santoshlumar Srivastav, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 2536/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Shraddha Nichal
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

Kanchan Santoshlumar Srivastav, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Nashik

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

ITA 2533/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Shraddha Nichal
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

Chandrakant Viththal Bhopi, Raigad vs. ITO Ward 1, Panvel

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

ITA 2405/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Chandrakant Viththal Bhopi Ito, Ward-1, Panvel At Chinchpada, Post Panvel, Tal. Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad – 410206 Pan: Bjdpb7610L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Ajinkya M Vaishampayan Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 05-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 2(14)Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Osman Mohammed, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-4(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 292/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD

Akhila Devi Javvadi, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Kothagudem

ITA 204/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us :

Section 141Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद 'बी' बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘Bench, Hyderabad श्री मंजूनाथ

Warangal Club, Hanamkonda vs. ITO, Ward-1, Warangal

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

ITA 109/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Praveen, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

served on the appellant. However, the appellant had failed to file return of income in response to the said notice. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated 06.06.2023 and 20.07.2023 were issued requesting to file various details. Once again, the appellant failed to comply with the notice ... issued under section 142(1) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer on the basis of information available with the Department completed best judgement assessment in terms of section 147 r.w.s.144 of the Income 4 ITA.No.109/Hyd./2025 tax Act 1961, dated 29.02.2024 and determined the total income

Contai Rotary Community Welfare Trust, Meinipur vs. I.T.O., Ward 1(1), Exemption, Kolkata

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

ITA 52/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.52/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Contai Rotary Community Welfare Trust………………………..………….……Appellant Rathtala, P.O. Contai, Dist. Purba Medinipur, W.B. – 721401. [Pan: Aaatc7008C] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Exemption, Kolkata…..……....….….. ……………….........…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.11.2024 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. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Charitable Trust & Registered U/S 12A Of The Act. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 By Declaring Nil Income Which Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass To Examine Certain Issues Particularly The Expenses Claimed Under The Head Of ‘Income From Other Sources’. Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee Requiring Submission Of Certain Documents But No Response Was Received. Thereafter, A Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued Calling For Details Of Expenses Claimed U/S 57 Of The Act But The Assessee Again Failed To Respond. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer Issued Reminder To

Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 57

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

Sunny Trexim Private Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 645/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Rakesh Mishra]

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 195Section 263Section 40a

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी "द"प

Midas Golden Distilleries P. Ltd, Sriperumbudur vs. Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2955/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2955/Chny/2024, Assessment Years: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार धिरर