← 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)

Mahender Malik, Hisar vs. ITO, Ward -(1), Hisar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5586/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2018-19 Sh. Mahender Malik, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 388, Satroad Khurad, Near Ward-1, Adarsh High School, Hisar Hisar Pan: Bitpm5341N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Karishma Rathore, Adv. Sh. Mayank Patawari, Adv. Department By Sh. Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The “Cit(A)/Nfac”], Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069269047(1), Dated 30.09.2024 Involving Proceedings Under Section 154 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. For The Reasons Stated In The Assessee’S Condonation Averments, Delay Of 3 Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal Is Condoned In Light Of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 Itr 471 (Sc). 3. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing That The Sole Substantive Issue Between The Parties Is That Of Correctness Of The Learned Lower Authorities’ Action Assessing The Assessee’S Interest Component Of Land Acquisition Compensation U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, While Invoking Section 57(Iv) R.W.S. 56(1)(A) R.W.S. 145A(B) Of The Act. 4. Learned Sr. Dr Representing The Department Vehemently Argued That The Instant Issue Is No More Res Integra In Light Of Mahender Pal Narang Vs. Cbdt (2020) 423 Itr 13 (P&H) As Well As Pcit Vs. Inderjit Singh Sodhi Huf (2024) 161 Taxmann.Com 301 (Del.) Wherein The Department Has Succeeded Before Their Lordships That The Impugned Interest Component Ought To Be Assessed As Income From “Other” Sources Only.

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

Assessing Officer ("AO") served notice under section 143(2) upon the assessee on 22.09.2019 followed by issue of notice und er section 142(1) of the Act on 23.11.2020. The Ld. AO completed the assessment on 22.01.2021 under section 143(3) r.w. section ... case of the assessee. 6.1 Elaborating the above contentions, the Ld. AR pointed out that in notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 23.11.2020 (copy at Paper Book page 1-2), the Ld. AO required the assessee to furnish documentary evidence in support of claim that the amount

Babubhai Joitaram Patel, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT/ACIT Cent-1, RKT, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 22/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR
Section 153CSection 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,राजकोट "यायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN

Tarique Akhlaque, Lucknow vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Sasaram

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/PAT/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Jan 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.512/Pat/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Tarique Akhlaque.…………………………… …………………....Appellant C/O Ahsan Khan, Flat No.6, Dashrath Bhawan, Rajeev Nagar, Jama Masjid Road, Munshipuliya, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226016.. [Pan: Avxpa1802A] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(4), Sasaram……..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manab Adak, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 27, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 28, 2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member And

Sh. Jatinder Kaura (Deceased) Through L/H Smt. Dimple Kaura, Raikot, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jagraon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1394/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1394/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Jatinder Kaura The Ito, (Through L/H Smt. Dimple Kaura, Vs Ward-1, House No. 338, New Green City, Jagraon. Raikot, Distt. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Agwpk6095P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kuldeep Singh, Itp & Shri Mps Malhotra, Itp Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Kuldeep Singh, ITP & Shri MPS Malhotra, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH ,CHANDIGARH BEFORE

Deepa Kamal Kishore Sharma, Kochi, Kerala vs. ITO, Ward 7(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2209/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 2208

Deepa Kamal Kishore Sharma, Kochi, Kerala vs. ITO, Ward 7(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2208/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 2208

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Nilesh Todi, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1807/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year:2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD

Jasmine Zubin Shroff, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2380/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2380/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs.Jasmine Zubin Shroff V The Income Tax (Through Legal Heir Zubin K S Officer, Shroff), Ward-7(1), Pune. 826/C No.5, Anklesharia Blocks, Dastur Meher Road, Camp, Pune - 411001. Pan:Basps7144E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B C Malakar Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe - Jcit Date Of Hearing 08/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Legal Heir Of Late Jasmine Z. Shroff Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 Dated 19.12.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The

Section 144Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK

Ritu Kalpesh Hiran, Satara vs. ITO, Satara

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

ITA 1649/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust, Pune vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1357/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption), 251, Budhwar Peth, City Post Chowk, Vs. Pune Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaatb4383K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, V.P:

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Renuka Silver Merchents, Nizamabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Nizamabad

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

ITA 972/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued on 13.08.2018, and the assessment proceedings were conducted through e-proceedings. Thereafter, notices under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 05.07.2019 and 12.12.2019 were issued calling for various details including bank statements, details of cash deposits made during the demonetization period, cash book

Sahit Chowdary Garapati, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1680/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘A’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “A” Bench, Hyderabad श्री मंजुनाथा

Vasuki Katakam, Kurnool vs. ITO., Ward-1, Kurnool

ITA 1327/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1327/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: CA Hari AgarwalFor Respondent: MS P Sumitha, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151ASection 64Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘SMC’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Bscpl Aurang Tollway Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 612/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay, wherein it was submitted that the appeal for the relevant assessment year was required to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the

Section 143(3)Section 263

NHAI and works carried out, etc., has been submitted to the A.O. in response to a specific question, along with notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act, dated 12.01.2021 and also explained the reasons for claiming depreciation on cost of road as intangible asset as per Section ... Revenue. The learned counsel for the assessee, further referring to the assessment order passed by the A.O. and consequent notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act, on various dates, submitted that, the case has been selected for scrutiny to verify various issues, including investment in intangible assets

Shree Govind Property & Investments Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2166/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Golden Goenka Credit Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1799/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh

R Rampuria Consultants Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1626/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 68

Rampuria Consultants Pvt. Ltd declaring the income to be nil. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) was issued on 10.9.2015 and notice under section 142(1) dated 13.6.2016 was issued along with the questionnaire. The assessee contended that the notices were without jurisdiction and relied upon section

Sanowar Ali Khan, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 25(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1503/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271ASection 282

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

Vaibhav Tewari, Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7737/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethvaibhav Tewari, Vs. Cit(A), Kautilya Bhawan, Mumbai- 88 Krishna Niwas, Society 400051. Park Narhi, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226001. Pan/Gir No: Aecpt2741P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 80D

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

Premji Bhurlal Gala, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Rang 24(1), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 6596/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2016-17 Premji Bhurlal Gala Addl. Cit Range 24(1), B-301, Water Ford, Cd Mumbai Barfiwala Road Juhu Fally Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai - 43, G Block, Bandra Kurla 400058 Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal & Satish Kumar, Ld. A. Rs. Revenue By : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.09.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. In The Instant Case, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Act, On The Basis Of Search & Survey Action Under Section 132 Of The Act Carried Out In The Case Of M/S. Evergreen Enterprises, Wherein The Statement Of The Partner In M/S. Evergreen Enterprises, Mr. Nilesh Bharani Was Recorded Under Section 132(4) Of The Act, Unearthing An Undisclosed Activity, 2 Premji Bhurlal Gala

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal & SatishFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, SR. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 269SSection 271Section 271D

issued to the Assessee by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). 5. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initially issued a notice dated 12.01.2022 under Section 142(1) of the Act and therefore show cause notices dated 03.02.2022 and 08.03.2022, however, the Assessee made no compliance to the aforesaid notices and thus