← 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)

Ratnaravi Metal Impex, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Ofiicer 19(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 268/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble1.T.A. No. 268/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272ASection 69A

| soe atte aftreazur aamits, Fas | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE

S.K. Ventures, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2), Kalyan

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1839/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 80

National Faceless Assessment Centre effect to the order passed u/s.263 of the Act. The Ld.AO sought for issued notice under section 142(1) in the order giving details regarding difference in turnover and eligibility 4 ITA No.1839/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2015-16 S. K. Ventures conditions for claiming deduction

Milagro Ceremica Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 15(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1033/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Parth Bhatt, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 156

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

DCIT(Exemp)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Education and Development Trust, Mumbai

ITA 5954/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 11(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

initiation to reassessment proceedings were not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. After the objections were filed the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 142(1) on 21/03/2022 and proceeded to frame assessment without following the procedure laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case ... same the Assessee filed return of income on 01/02/2021 and requested for reasons recorded for reopening the assessment. Thereafter, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 10/02/2021 whereby reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were communicated to the Assessee. The Assessee filed objections to reopening

M/S Mississippi It Services Privte Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -Circle 1, Thane

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

ITA 5549/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanm/S. Mississippi It Services Dcit Circle-1, Private Limited. Qureshi Mansion Road, 215, New Nirmal Nagar, Jantanagar Vs. Thane, Maharashtra – 400 Road, Nr. Station, Nr. Podar School, 604 Bhayander West, Thane, Maharashtra - 401101 Pan: Aagcm4216K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J(SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ

Asst.Commissioner of Income-Tax - Circle 41-1-1, Mumbai vs. Satya Kim Yashpal, Mumbai

ITA 5503/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 250

initiated for non- compliance as statement of HSBC bank account was not furnished in response to notice dt 10.10.2014 rd under sections 142(1) of the income-tax Act 1961.” 36. The above addition made by the Assessing Officer was challenged by the Assessee in appeal before

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax- 41 1 1, Mumbai vs. Satya Kim Yashpal, Mumbai

ITA 5502/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2008-09
Section 250

initiated for non- compliance as statement of HSBC bank account was not furnished in response to notice dt 10.10.2014 rd under sections 142(1) of the income-tax Act 1961." The above addition made by the Assessing Officer was challenged by the Assessee in appeal before

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 41(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Satya Kim Yashpal, Mumbai

ITA 5309/MUM/2024[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 1997-98

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 250

initiated for non- compliance as statement of HSBC bank account was not furnished in response to notice dt 10.10.2014 rd under sections 142(1) of the income-tax Act 1961.” 36. The above addition made by the Assessing Officer was challenged by the Assessee in appeal before

DCIT 41.1.1, Kautilya Bhawan, Mumb vs. Satya Kim Yashpal, Mumbai

ITA 5138/MUM/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2001-02
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule; Shri Bhangepatil
Section 250

initiated for non- compliance as statement of HSBC bank account was not furnished in response to notice dt 10.10.2014 rd under sections 142(1) of the income-tax Act 1961." 36. The above addition made by the Assessing Officer was challenged by the Assessee in appeal before

DCIT 41 1 1, Mumbai vs. Satya Kim Yashpal, Mumbai

ITA 5137/MUM/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2001-02

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 250

initiated for non- compliance as statement of HSBC bank account was not furnished in response to notice dt 10.10.2014 rd under sections 142(1) of the income-tax Act 1961.” 36. The above addition made by the Assessing Officer was challenged by the Assessee in appeal before

ACIT Circle 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Johnson Dye Works Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1118/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Prabhash Shankar, Am Acit Circle 4(3)(1), Mumbai Johnson Dye Works Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Ground Floor, New Era House, Churchgate – 400020. Vs. Mogul Lane, Matunga (W), Mumbai – 400016. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj2082J (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia/Samir Shah Respondent By : Shri. Ajay Singh (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2012-13. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal Along With Additional Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Deleting Transactions Of Rs. 2,12,42,250/-In Nsel Exchange As Client Code Modification Transaction For Shifting Of Profit/ Loss Added To The Income Of The Assessee Relying On The Decision In The Case Of Coronation Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Dcit 390 Itr 464 (Bom.) Without Going Into The Merits Of The Case? Johnson Dye Works Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh Dadia/Samir ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Singh (Sr. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI. PRABHASH SHANKAR, AM ACIT

Sudesh Kumar Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Ghaziabad

ITA 2012/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Urbainia Spaces Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle 13, Flat No.19, Ground Floor, Prop. No. Delhi. 01, Pardhan Complex, Main Road, Mandawali, Delhi-1100 92 Pan :Aabcu6277D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Shashi Rani, Agra vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Agra

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 64/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

Chhaya Devi, Muzaffarpur vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 437/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 437/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Chhaya Devi,………….…………………….………Appellant New Area Sikandarpur, Muzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aakpd7640M] -Vs.- National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac)…………………………………………….....Respondent New Delhi Appearances By: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 10ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)

from salary, house property, business and other sources and claimed deduction under section 10AA of the I.T. Act. A series of notices under section 142(1) totaling eight in numbers, were issued along with questionnaire which were complied from time to time. The appellant alsosought hearing through video conference which

Jaya Singh, Patna vs. Dc, Ac Circle-1, Bhagalpur, Bihar

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

ITA 430/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

under section 148 of the Act on 27.04.2021 declaring total income of Rs.35,02,660/- . During the course of assessment proceeding, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee by the ld. Assessing Officer along with questionnaire on 29.06.2021. But the assessee did not furnish

Pioneer Education Society, Haryana vs. ITO, Patna

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

ITA 406/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 430/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Jaya Singh,………………………………….………Appellant 6-B/9, North Shrikrishnapuri, Patna-800013, Bihar [Pan:Bfxps2289J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Circle-1, Bhagalpur,………………………….....Respondent Bhagalpur, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Ranjeet Kr. Singh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Rinku Singh, Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

under section 148 of the Act on 27.04.2021 declaring total income of Rs.35,02,660/- . During the course of assessment proceeding, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee by the ld. Assessing Officer along with questionnaire on 29.06.2021. But the assessee did not furnish

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3)(1), Surat vs. Hindustan Steel and Cement, Althan-Bhatar, Surat

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 266/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.266/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hindustan Steel & Cement, Ward - 2(3)(1), Althan-Bhatar, Plot No. 1D, Sai Surat Ashish Society, Althan Bhatar, University Road, Surat - 394201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaefh 5030 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

Section 142(1)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Yoosuf Valiya Parambath, Kannur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 and Tps, Kannur

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

ITA 811/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Yoosuf Valiya Parambath .......... Appellant Valiya Parambath House, Palathai Panoor, Kadavathur, Kannur 670676 [Pan: Apkpv6497B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 1 & Tps, Kannur Appellant By: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Omanakuttan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Omanakuttan, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JM Assessment

New Chalai Agencies, Trivandrum vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 807/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18 New Chalai Agencies Opposite Kairali Ford Inchakkal Acit Vallakadavu Po Vs. Circle-1(2) Kerala 695 008 Trivandrum Pan No :Aaffn7523C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri N.S. Rajagopal, A.R. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Rajagopal, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

ITA No.807/Coch/2024 New Chalai Agencies, Trivandrum IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH:COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

Jomon John, Bazar vs. I. T. O, Ward 2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 271Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274

ITA No.578/Coch/2024 Jomon John, Alappuzha IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH:COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT