“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)

Nimitaya Hotel & Resort Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the captioned appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 1832/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2019-20 A.Y. 2018-19

Section 24Section 263Section 263(1)

1 ITA Nos. 1822 to 1835/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh Mahagun Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 3664/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, F: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Saurer Embroidery Systems India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3508/DEL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Jhamba, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 142Section 145(3)Section 69A

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

Pareshkumar Nenshibhai Thakkar, Rajkot vs. The PCIT-1, Rajkot

ITA 382/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am.- & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.381&382/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14, 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Pareshkumar Nenshibhai Thakkar Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 6, Dharmendra Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360001. Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdt0333R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Section 133ASection 147Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM.- & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM आयकरअपीलसं

Pareshkumar Nenshibhai Thakkar, Rajkot vs. The PCIT- Rajkot, Rajkot

ITA 381/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Section 133ASection 147Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM.- & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM आयकरअपीलसं

Paras Mal Jain, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1469/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR (Thru' V.C.)

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A” JAIPUR श्री संदीप गोसाई, न्यायिक

Mr. Jobanji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO. Ward-3(2)(2), Ahmedabad

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 264/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.264/Ahd/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Mr. Jobanji Thakor The Ito F-40, Abugiri Society बनाम / Ward-3(2)(2) Tal. Daskroi, Jagatpur V/S. Ahmedabad Ahmedabad - 382 470 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aknpt 2930 M (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri A.P. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 19/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"] Dated 28.12.2018, Confirming The Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2017 Passed By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

issued on 18.09.2017 and served via speed post, with a hearing fixed on 03.10.2017. Subsequently, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with a questionnaire was issued on 27.09.2017, but the same was returned unserved. Another notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued

Prahalad Rai Sutodia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 36(5), Kolkata

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

ITA 912/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 912/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Prahalad Rai Sutodia,………………….....……Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Sagar Mansion”, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite Nos. 202 & 203, Hare Street, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Arsps6928G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-36(5), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 6Th Floor, Eastern Metropolitan By Pass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

issued to the assessee on 21.09.2018 by ITO, Ward-35(1), Kolkata from ITBA and duly served on the assessee. Further notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 03.06.2019 alongwith detail questionnaire and served upon the assessee by e-mail requesting to submit his reply

Dilip Kumar Mondal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 34(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 1326/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1326/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Dilip Kumar Mondal,…………….…..…………Appellant 16, Rabindra Sarani, Lal Bazar, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aflpm1834N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-34(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri L.N Dash, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 142(1)Section 148

appellant which was the sales receipts from selling musical instruments. In the course of e-proceeding, the ld. Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) and thereafter a show- cause notice dated 09.12.2019 was issued to the assessee asking for explanation that why the amount of Rs.15

Tropex Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1231/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 1231/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Tropex Suppliers Private Limited,…………Appellant 113, Netaji Subhash Road, 5Th Floor, Room No. 93, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabct1459N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

reason large share premium received. Accordingly, notice under section 143(2) was issued and served on the assessee-company. Later notice under section 142(1) was also issued to the assessee. In response to the said notices, ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee appeared and produced statement of accounts

M/S. Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-1, Ltu, Chennai

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

ITA 2488/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2488/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Manali Petrochemicals Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 88 Spic House, Mount Road, Income Tax, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. Corporate Circle -1, Ltu, Chennai. [Pan:Aaacm3404D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P.V. Sudakar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.05.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 57 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Sudakar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

filed return of income declaring total income of ₹.42,42,23,100/-. Under scrutiny, notices under section 143(2) of the Act and section 142(1) of the Act were issued. In the scrutiny proceedings, the assessee was asked to show-cause why provisions of Rule

Dhanushkodi Harideertham, Pudukottai vs. ITO, Intl Taxnl Ward 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 214/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)

mandated by CBDT Circular No. 19 of 2019. Further, he referred to page 36 of paper book and argued that the notice under section 142(1) of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer contains no DIN and the assessment made thereon is illegal ... Kumar, CIT referred to page 35 of the paper book and argued vehemently that DIN is very much issued for the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. After considering the submissions of the Id. AR and the Id. DR and on perusal of page

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mulliambal Rathnasamy Pitchakannu Eraavanan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1810/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/2024 [In Ita No. 1810/Chny/2024] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Arvind E & Mrs. Baskaravalli Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), (Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mrp Investigation Building, Eraavanan), No. 4, Rice Mill Road, Chennai. Erimedu, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045. [Pan:Aaape5554D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Dr Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit Drew Our Attention To Additional Grounds Raised By The Appellant – Revenue. He Submits That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate

Section 159Section 2

74/Chny/24 9. We note that on an information regarding sale of immovable property of the assessee, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act seeking the details. The assessee appeared and stated that he is a power agent of one Mr. Thangarajan Nadar sold the property

Vishvanath, Kaushambi vs. Income Tax Officer- 2(5), Kaushambi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 159/ALLD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

Section 142(1)Section 147

I.T.A. No.159/Alld/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Kolsa Khadan Kamgar Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Sillewada Project, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Nagpur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 12/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

receipt of the notice in response to which the assessee has not filed its return of income under section 153C. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act, was issued along with detailed questionnaire on 26/03/2021, 31/02/2021 and 09/09/2021, requiring the assessee to furnish the information and document in support ... assessee chose not to file its return of income, as desired by the Assessing Officer. Further a final show cause notice under section 142(1) was sent to the assessee on 09/09/2021, requiring it to file the return of income and reply without any further delay but the assessee

Panhera Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Buldhana vs. ITO Ward-2, Khamgaon

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 496/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 142(1)

case is that, the assessee, during the assessment proceedings, failed to comply with three statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). As a result of such non-compliant attitude of the assessee, the Assessing Officer levied penalty

Panhera Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Buldhana vs. ITO Ward-2, Khamgaon

In the result, assessee’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 495/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 142(1)

Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Third Floor, Aayakar Bhavan vs. N Kumar Housing and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Seventh Floor

ITA 481/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 28Section 41(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

Kiran Anil Gothi, Washim vs. ITO Ward-1, Akola

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed, but for statistical purpose only

ITA 217/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Jineshi ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMC MATTER ITA no.217/Nag

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Unique Realities Builders & Developers, Nagpur

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 12/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C