“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)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3045/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Respondent: Mr.S. Muralidhar, FCA

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 801A(7)Section 80I

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

M/S. Jindal Brugs Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 947/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakkani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH

Miker Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Ward-10(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 849/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (Judicial Member)

Section 144Section 151Section 250Section 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

ACIT, Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Rihting Coating Technology (India) Pvt.Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1991/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68

Book] filed by the Assessee, we find that the Assessee had explained reasons for failure to comply with notice, dated 13/06/2016, issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. It was stated that on account of medical issues faced by the auditors of the Assessee between August, 2016 to January ... Assessment Year 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. “Gross profit: We have submitted all the details desired by the assessing officer vide notice under section 142(1) dated 13.06.2016 before him during the remand hearing and also the same has been accepted by the Assessing Officer without any adverse comments

M/S Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incomet Tax. Circle- Ltu -2, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1678/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C NareshFor Respondent: ShriKrishna Kumar SR. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 90

issue in question was raised, and the assessee duly explained the same in response to a notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. Despite this, the Ld. AO has sought to reassess the same issue, thereby reopening the assessment proceedings on identical grounds, which constitutes a clear case ... change of opinion." 11. Upon review of the records, it is evident that in response to the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, the issue concerning the exclusion of foreign income earned in Dubai and Antwerp was specifically raised in Point No. 19 of the said notice

Mmtc Ltd vs. DCIT Circle 5(1)

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2732/DEL/2006[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2025AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Clix Capital Services Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Pcit, Plot No. 23, 5Th Floor, Aggarwal Delhi-1, Delhi Corporate Tower Govind Lal Sikka Marg, Rajendra Place, West Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi, India, 110008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacc0642F

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Bharati, CIT DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 37

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S

Poonam Saxena, Aligarh vs. ITO, Ward 4(1)(5), Aligarh

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

ITA 34/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ AGRA (Through Physical/Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Preeti Agrawal, Vaibhav Kunj Dayal Bagh Agra vs. Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Income Tax Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 151/AGR/2024[ay-2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 151/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2018-19) Ms. Preeti Agrawal Pr. Cit- 1, बनाम/ 22, Vaibhav Kunj, Jyoti Road, Agra. Vs. Dayalbagh, Agra. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ahcpa-6085-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra For (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Vide Impugned Order Dated 23-03-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 27-01-2021. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 330 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Selected To Verify The Issue Of Low Income In Comparison To Large Commission Receipt. The Ld. Ao

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Gargh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 40A(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Shri Ram Saran Mittal, Agra vs. Pr CIT - 1, Agra

The appeal stand allowed as indicated upon conclusion of hearing

ITA 27/AGR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.27/Agr/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) बनाम/ Sh. Ram Saran Mittal Ccit(Osd)/Pcit-1, 62-B, Nehru Nagar, Agra. Agra. Vs. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ablpm-2281-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Sahib P. Satsangi, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Vide Impugned Order Dated 31-03-2022 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 30-11-2019. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Accepted In Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Notices U/S 142(1) Were Issued To The Assessee Which Were Duly Been Responded To By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Sh. Sahib P. SatsangI, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Al-Hamd Agro Food Product Pvt. Ltd., Aligarh vs. PCIT-1, Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 37/AGR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 37/Agr/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17) Al-Hamd Agro Food Product P. Ltd. Pr. Cit - 1 बनाम/ C/O Deepak Singh, Advocate Agra. Vs. 2, Court Of Wards Compound, Aligarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafca-0964-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Deepak Singh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 Vide Impugned Order Dated 31-03-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 02-11-2016. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. Upon Perusal Of Case Records, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Case Was Subjected To Limited Scrutiny. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Notices U/S 142(1) Were Issued To The Assessee Calling For Various Details Which Were Duly Been Responded

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Singh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Rukmani Devi Jain, Agra vs. Pr.CIT.-1, Agra

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 30/AGR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 29/Agr/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.30/Agr/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Rukmani Devi Jain Pr. Cit - 1 बनाम/ 37/396/17, Gopal Kunj Agra. Vs. Agra (Up)-282002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Anxpj-7557-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Deependra Mohan, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of These Appeals, The Assessee Assails Revision Of Order U/S 263 For Assessment Years (Ay) 2015-16 & 2016-17. First, We Take Up Appeal For Ay 2015-16 Which Assail Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Agra (Pr.Cit) Vide Impugned Order Dated 22-03-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 24-12-2017. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under.

For Appellant: Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Rukmani Devi Jain, Agra vs. Pr.CIT-1, Agra

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 29/AGR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Rajish Kumar Gupta, Agra vs. Pr.CIT.-1, Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 26/AGR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

B.P. Oil Mills Ltd., Agra vs. Pr.CIT-1, Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 25/AGR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT/DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

M/S Prefect Footwear, Agra vs. Pr.CIT., (Centrl), Kanpur

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 23/AGR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.23/Agr/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Perfect Footwear Pr. Cit (Central), बनाम/ 76, Kailash Vihar Kanpur. Vs. Bye Pass Road, Agra -282005. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aarfp-0237-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Sushil Maheshwari, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 Vide Impugned Order Dated 15-03-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 14-12-2018. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Selected For Scrutiny. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Notices Were Issued To The Assessee U/S 142(1) On Various Issues Which Were Duly Responded To By The Assessee In E-Proceedings. The Assessment Order Take Note

For Appellant: Sh. Sushil Maheshwari, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Pramod Kumar Goyal, Gwalior vs. Pr. CIT, Gwalior

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 368/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 368/Agr/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14) Pramod Kumar Goyal Pr. Cit बनाम/ (Prop. M/S. Shreyansh Traders) Gwalior Chhutmal Ki Bajariya, Maina Wali Gali, Vs. Dal Bazar, Gwalior(Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agspg-1575-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Navin Gargh, Adv. – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Gwalior (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Vide Impugned Order Dated 23-03-2018 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 23-03-2016. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. Upon Perusal Of Assessment Order, It Could Be Seen That The Assessee’S Return Of Income Was Scrutinized & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Notices U/S 142(1) Were Issued Raising Various Queries Against The Assessee. The Assessee Claimed Exemption U/S 54B. Upon Perusal Of Computations & Various

For Appellant: Sh. Navin Gargh, Adv. – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50CSection 54B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE

Shri Bharatbhai Raysinh Vala, Devali Deda, Kodinar, Dist. Junagadh vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(4), Amreli

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

ITA 603/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148A

filing, the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The various notices under section 142(1) were issued to pareshdodiyal177@gmail.com, which is an email ID to which I do not have access. To the best of my knowledge. this email ID might

Shri Anish Hasan Bakhai, Keshod vs. The AO, Ward-1, Junagadh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 132/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR

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

आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण,राजकोट"यायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI

Bal Mukund Patidar, Bhopal vs. Deputy Commisioner of ITO 2(3), Bhopal

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 585/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Paresh M Joshibal Mukund Patidar, Dcit Of Ito 2(3), बनाम/ E-6/7, Arera Colony, Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Pan: Afwpp2759L) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri S.K. Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.04.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 246Section 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Iliyas, Khargone vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 445/IND/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Paresh M Joshiiliyas, Nfac, बनाम/ 56, Khargone Road Bedia, Delhi Vs. Khargone

Section 05Section 07Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 24Section 250Section 253