“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)

Meena Jewellers Extension Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 329/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.328/Hyd/2024 To 330/Hyd/2024 & Ita 385/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/S Meena Jewellers Vs. Acit, Circle-5(1) / Extension Private Limited Circle-16(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aaicm3013G]

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M.Vijay Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Meena Jewellers Extension Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabd

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 328/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M.Vijay Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 250Section 68Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Sumita Roy Chowdhury, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 48(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1273/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1273/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Sumita Roy Chowdhury,………….....…………Appellant C/O. Mahadev Ghosh, Advocate, Bf-199, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700064 [Pan:Ahopr1722P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…..………………………...Respondent Ward-48(1), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: Shri Mahadev Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Nicholash Murmu, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 10, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)Section 80I

scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) was issued on 25th September, 2012 and served on the assessee. Subsequently notice under section 142(1) was issued on 8th August, 2013 and duly served upon the assessee. The assessee’s representative filed the supporting documentary evidences and explained

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Coimbatore vs. Ms Viswa and Devji Diamonds Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 327/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.327/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-2018. The Deputy Commissioner Viswa & Devji Diamonds Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, Vs. New No.16,Old No.239, Corporate Circle 1, T.V.Swamy Road (East) Coimbatore R.S. Puram, Coimbatore 641 002. Pan: Aaccv 4942M

For Appellant: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate

Section 143(3)

1 17.11.2023 Return of Income and Financials 1 2 24.09.2018 Notice under Section 143(2) of the 19 Act 3 07.08.2019 Notice under Section 142(1) of the 23 Act 4 --- Reply to Notice under Section 30 142(1) of the Act 5 19.08.2019 Notice under Section 142(1 ... Details of advances received 523 16 --- Reply to Notice under Section 575 142(1) of the Act 17 28.11.2019 Notice under Section 142(1) of the 581 Act 18 02.12.2019 Reply to Notice under Section 583 142(1) of the Act 19 --- Purchase Ledger 584 20 --- Stock Ledger

Minal Shroff, Rs Puram Tamilnadu vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward -2(3), Coimbatore

ITA 2424/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr.S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(40)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH: CHENNΑΙ श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक

Psb Constructions, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(5), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14,

ITA 2288/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2286, 2287 & 2288/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 P S B Constructions, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 356, 5Th Cross Street, Non Corporate Ward 1(5), Gandhi Nagar (P.O.), K.K. Nagar, Madurai. Madurai 625 020. [Pan: Aaffp6937J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate & Shri S. Kumarasubramanian, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate, But Identical Orders All Dated 30.06.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

notice, the assessee furnished ITR declaring the same particulars of income as already declared. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Since there was no response, a show-cause notice was issued proposing to complete the assessment by making addition of ₹.1

Psb Constructions, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(5), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14,

ITA 2287/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

Psb Constructions, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(5), Madurai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2013-14,

ITA 2286/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 264Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

Pehal, Chhatarpur vs. ITO (Exemption), Gwalior

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

ITA 46/AGR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Parekh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11

Poonam Marwaha, Amritsar vs. ACIT DCIT Cen Cir, Amritsar

ITA 306/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 44ASection 69

I.T.A. No. 306/Asr/2024 Poonam Marwaha v. ACIT DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE

Jarnail Singh Gill, Jagraon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jagraon

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

ITA 941/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: The Tribunal & The Matter Was Remanded Back To Ao For Fresh Adjudication. Thereafter, The Assessment Order Was Passed

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

assessed income of Rs. 47,00,000/- on account of unexplained money. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, statutory notices under section 142(1) were issued on five different occasions. As per the AO, there was no compliance on the part of the assessee and penalty proceeding under section ... imposition of penalty of Rs. 10,000/- per default under section 271(1)(b) for non compliance with the statutory notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act and accordingly, penalty of Rs 50,000/- was levied on the assessee under section 271(1

Hemant Behl, Solan vs. Income Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 691/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A), However The Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed On Account Of Delay In Filing Of The Appeal Without Considering The Merits Of The Case. Against The Said Order Of The Ld Cit(A), The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Ms. Komal Thakur, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

account maintained with SBI and since assessee did not file the return of income for the impugned assessment year, issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act to file return of income. However, there was no compliance on part of the assessee and thereafter, after issuing subsequent notices which

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Meena Singla, Focal Point, Khanna

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 660/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate and Shri Virsain AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal,CIT, DR

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

scrutiny and a notice under Section 143(2) was issued on 17.09.2020. The AO thereafter issued number of questionnaires vide notice under Section 142(1). The AO has observed that during the course of search, a locker was opened out of which gold and diamond jewellery was found. While explaining

Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad vs. Bela Kiritkumar Nahta, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 882/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.882/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito Bela Kiritkumar Nahta बनाम/ B-502, 5Th Floor 5, Gopinath Society V/S. Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan Opp. Sunrise Park Ambawadi Vastrapur Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Acapn 1242 K अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

period (09/11/2016 to 31/12/2016). A notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 21/08/2018 and served electronically. Further notices under Section 142(1) of the Act, along with detailed questionnaires, were issued on 31/01/2019 and 26/09/2019, requesting details about cash deposits and supporting documents for improvement costs ... evidence relied upon is already part of the assessment record. 7.2. The records show that the assessee responded to the notice under Section 142(1) dated 31/01/2019 by furnishing detailed explanations and supporting documents on 15/02/2019. These included: • Bank statements and cash book: The entries in the bank book corresponded

Shail Y Patel, Vadodara vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1) (Prev. Circle 1(3)), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 714/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 145Section 234A

total income in Part B-TI of ITR). Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 03.08.2017. Notice under Section 142(1) read with Section 129 of the Act along with detailed questionnaire was issued on 03.09.2018, 11.10.2018 and 142(1) notice dated 11.10.2018. Show cause notice

Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 434/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.434/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel The Acit बनाम / V/S. Circle-3(3) 2, Parivar Society Part-2 Near Premchand Nagar Row-House, Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 380 015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Adrpp 8846 K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Dated 09/01/2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"] Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ao") Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2017-18.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

verifying cash deposits during the demonetization period. The AO issued a notice under Section 143(2) dated 13/08/2018 and subsequent notices under Section 142(1)of the Act for calling details regarding cash deposits. The assessee failed to respond to multiple notices and show-cause notices, leading

Mehsana District Co. Operative Purchase and Sales Union Ltd., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle Mehsana, Mehsana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1760/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 244ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

case was selected for limited scrutiny. Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 09.08.2018 was issued and thereafter notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 15.03.2019. In response to the above notices, the assessee filed submissions from time to time. The Assessing Officer observed

DCIT Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs. Tatva Buildcon, Bhairavnath Road, Maninagar

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

ITA 1726/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1726/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Dcit-2(1)(1) Tatva Buildcon बनाम/ Ahmedabad 1, Vraj Vihar Apartment, V/S. 2, Gopal Baug Society Bhairavnath Road Maninagar Ahmedabad – 380 008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaift 8076 F अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chirag R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Chirag R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

details of unsecured loans. A notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.09.2018, followed by various notices under Section 142(1) of the Act, requiring the assessee to provide information about unsecured loans received during the year. Total unsecured loans amounted to Rs.8

Natraj Construction Co., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 775/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

case of the assessee was reopened and notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 27.03.2021. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee did not file any details and hence final show cause notice ... issued alongwith notices under Section 142(1) of the Act. Since the assessee has not field any details, the Assessing Officer ITA Nos.774 & 775/Ahd/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Natraj Construction Co. vs. ACIT Page 3 of 5 passed the assessment under Section 144 read with Section

Natraj Construction Co., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 774/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69