← 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)

Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam vs. ACIT, Circle, Kollam

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

ITA 324/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Navdeep Educational Trust 38/109, Navdeep Mundakkal East 691001 Acit Vs. Kollam Circle Kerala Kollam Pan No : Aabtn0952H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Surendranath Rao, A.R. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)/ Nfac Dated 26.02.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1061508122(1) For The Ay 2016-17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

ITA No.324/Coch/2024 Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH: COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

Sir Syed Educational & Welfare Society, Bhopal vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 821/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshisir Syed Educational & Assessment Unit, Social Welfare Society, Income Tax Department, 867, Ankur Complex, Delhi बनाम/ Hb Colony, Koh E Fiza, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aacts0888E Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2025

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

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

Pappu Jaiswal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 281/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

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

Pratima Panwar, Jaipur vs. I.T.O, Ward 3(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 218/JPR/2025[A.Y 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. G. M. Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 69A

dated 13.02.2018 declaring salary and bank interest income. 2. That the assessee has furnished all the details as required through notice under section 142(1) of the IT Act dated 15.01.2019, 20.02.2019, 20.08.2019 and letter dated 16.09.2019. In this regard refer to our reply dated 26.02.2019 and 04.10.2019 unloaded

Vinod Kumar Chugh, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 274

assessed income within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2012-13. On 12/09/2017, notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to produce a Source of income, copy of IT return filed with Computation of total income ... Bank statements for the relevant period, and Source of Cash deposited and Credit entries. The assesse complied with the aforesaid notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 through an Authorized Representative (AR), CA K.L. Sharma. 4. The Show Cause notice was issued under section

Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT-Cercle 6, Jaipur

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

ITA 234/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARINDER KUMAR

Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 233/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARINDER KUMAR

Rajashthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 232/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARINDER KUMAR

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Vimal Parwal, Jaipur

In the result , the appeal for the Assessment Year 2016-17 filed by the Revenue and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee for the same assessment year are also dismissed

ITA 1231/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, C.A. &For Respondent: Mrs Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 148Section 153CSection 250

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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Vimal Parwal, Jaipur

In the result , the appeal for the Assessment Year 2016-17 filed by the Revenue and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee for the same assessment year are also dismissed

ITA 1230/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, C.A. &For Respondent: Mrs Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 148Section 153CSection 250

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

Kanwaldeep Kaur, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 89/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 147Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Income Tax Officer, Mohali vs. Gurtej Singh, Mohali

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 806/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 147Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula vs. Estate Officer, Huda Panchkula, Panchkula

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee in those appeals are also dismissed

ITA 221/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal & Ms. Rattan Kaur, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)
Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula vs. Estate Officer, Huda Panchkula, Panchkula

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee in those appeals are also dismissed

ITA 220/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal & Ms. Rattan Kaur, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)
Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula vs. Estate Officer, Huda Panchkula, Panchkula

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee in those appeals are also dismissed

ITA 219/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal & Ms. Rattan Kaur, C.A’sFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)
Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Sardarsarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 821/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.821/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sardarsarovar Narmada The Pr.Cit, बनाम/ Nigam Ltd. Ahmedabad-3 V/S. Block-12, 1St Floor Ahmedabad – 380 014 Near Sachivalaya Complex Gandhiangar -382 010 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccs 6704 L अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arti N. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 37(1)

Claim of any other amount allowable as deduction in Schedule BP." The learned AR further drew attention to the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 06.01.2021 and 05.03.2021, wherein the FAO specifically sought detailed information relating to the "Any other amount allowable as deduction" amounting

Darshi A. Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (Intl. Taxation), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1857/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1857/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ Darshi A Shah The Ito 17, Haveli Apartment, Ward-1(Intl. Taxation), Vs. Ambawadi, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bzwps8361J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Parin Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. Dr 22/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 24/04/2025 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 30/08/2024 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Filed His Return Of Income For A.Y. 2017-18 On 22.07.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,61,850/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny To Examine The Cash Deposits In The Bank Account. In The Course Of Assessment, No Compliance Was Made By The Assessee. Therefore, The Assessment Was Completed Ex-Parte Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) On 25.11.2019 At Total Income Of

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 234BSection 271ASection 69A

lower authorities. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The assessee has brought on record a copy of notice under section 142(1) dated 8.10.2018 for the A.Y. 2016-17 wherein a specific query was made by the AO in respect of cash in hand of Rs.13

Krishna Filling Station, Karimnagar vs. ITO., Ward-2, Karimnagar

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

ITA 52/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 250

1 ITA.No.52/Hyd./2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE

Cowa Communication Network, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Warangal

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

ITA 414/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.414/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Cowa Communication Vs. Income Tax Officer Network, Warangal Ward-1 Pan:Aaifc9267D Warangal (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri, K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Y Srikanth Reddy, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 13/01/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Ld. First Appellate Authority Confirming The Order U/S 147 R W S 144 Of The L. T. Act Is Arbitrary & Contrary To The Provisions Of Law & Facts Sf The Case. 2. The Ld. First Appellate Authority Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Towards Unverifiable Expenses Of Rs.38,35,086/- Disallowed U/S 37(1) Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri, K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Y Srikanth Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 37(1)

ITA No 414 of 2025 COWA Communication Network आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Laxminarayan Malani, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 315/HYD/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA Sridhar JhawarFor Respondent: Shri Srikanth Reddy Y. Sr. AR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)

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