“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)

Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Trichy

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

ITA 31/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18 M/S. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust, No.274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Perambalur-621 212. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aagts 1793 N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Acit, Central Circle-2, Trichy. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Trichy. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.522/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. Srinivasan Charitable & (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Educational Trust, No.274-C, Thuraiyur Road, Perambalur-621 212. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aagts 1793 N] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Mr. G. Baskar, Advocate Department By Mr. Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing 22.08.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 08.11.2024 आदेश / O R Der Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

returns have been filed on 07.12.2019, in all cases, beyond the period granted by the respondent. On the same date a questionnaire under Section 142(1) has been issued calling for various particulars in response to which the petitioner has filed replies dated 13.12.2019 furnishing some of the particulars sought

Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Central Coircle-2, Trichy

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

ITA 30/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Trichy

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

ITA 29/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

Srinivasan Chritable and Educational Trust, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Trichy

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

ITA 28/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

Navin Ramesh Manshani, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 42(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3570/MUM/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. Br Baskaran & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ KUMAR

Mma Offshore Asia Vessel Operations Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

ITA 2567/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Punit Lohiya, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, D/R

Section 142(1)Section 195Section 263

Operations Pte Ltd ('MMA') PAN: AACCJ8004E Assessment Year ('AY'): 2019-20 Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2021-22/1034057441(1) Sub: Reply to notice issued under section 142(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 ('Act') We refer to the notice dated 7 July 2021 issued by your goodself under section 142(1 ... Operations Pte Ltd ('MMA') PAN: AACCJ8004E Assessment Year ('AY'): 2019-20 Notice No: ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2021-22/1035584713(1) Sub: Response to notice issued under section 142(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 ('Act') We refer to the notice issued by your goodself upon MMA for AY 2019-20 under section

Mma Offshore Asia Vessel Operations Pte Ltd., Singapore vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

ITA 2566/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Punit Lohiya, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, D/R

Section 142(1)Section 195Section 263

People Care Hospitals Private Limited, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 100/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 People Care Hospitals Private Vs Ito Limited, Plot No.1066, Baba Ward- 2 (1) Nagar, Near Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad Old Faridabad, Haryana 121002 Pan No.Aagcp8745G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Geranium Barkers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito 103/B, Near Shyamji Mandir Ward-1 (3) Malerna Road, Adarsh Nagar, Faridabad Ballabgarh Haryana -122004 Pan No.Aafcg3396P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Riven Health Club Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Ff-9, Vishnu Place Near Ward- 2 (2) Neelam Flyover Sector-20B Faridabad Faridabad Haryana121001 Pan No. Aagcr1343A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Advocate Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Advocate Sh. Dishant Sethi, Advocate

Section 131oSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Shree Shiv Sahyadri Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 7(3) Pune, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1788/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Shiv Sahyadri Nagari V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Pathanstha S Ward-7(3), Pune. Maryadit, Sai Park Road, Dighi, Pune – 411015. Pan: Aaeas1417N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Deepak Sasar – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shabana Parveen – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.06.2024 For A.Y.2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Wrongly Confirmed The Disallowance Of Deduction Of Rs.15,60,115/- Claimed By The Appellant U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Alternatively, The Interest Income Earned By The Appellant From The Investments In A Co-Operative Bank Is Also Eligible For Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Appellant Crave Leave To Add, Delete, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw All Or Any One Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal.”

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 2Section 250Section 80ISection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Kerala High Court held that a return filed by assessee beyond period stipulated under section 139(1) or 139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P provided further proceedings in relation to such assessments

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Panvel Circle Panvel vs. Outabox Media Solutions LLP, Ghatkopar Mumbai

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

ITA 177/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan H KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

been changed after the returns were filed. However, the records also reveals that the assessee had participated pursuant to the notice issued under Section 142 (1) and had not questioned the jurisdiction of the assessing officer. Section 124(3)(a) of the Income Tax Act precludes the assessee from questioning ... jurisdiction of the assessing officer, if he does not do so within 30 days of receipt of notice under Section 142 (1). 2. In the present case, the facts did not warrant the order made by the High Court. At the same time, this Court notices that the High Court

Ashabai Shriram Patil, Raver vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 165/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.165/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18 Ashabai Shriram Patil, V The Deputy Commissioner Shriram Agro Plast, S Of Income Tax, Gat No.1173, Pal Road Circle-1, Jalgaon. Raver, Jalgaon – 425508. Pan: Abdpp3516G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shabana Parveen – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.11.2023 For A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.25,44,500/- ,Treating As Unexplained Credits U/S 68 Of The I T Act & Taxing It U/S 115Bbe Of The I T Act Even Though All The Sales Are Duly Supported. The Aforesaid Additions Being Arbitrary, Perverse, Devoid Of Merits & Patently Illegal The Same May Please Be Deleted. 2. The Appellate Craves The Permission To Add, Amend, Modify, Alter, Revise, Substitute Delete Any Or All Ground Of The Appeal If Deemed Necessary At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” Brief Facts Of The Case : 2. The Assessee E-Filed Return Of Income For A.Y.2017-18 On 31.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,56,290/- & Agricultural Income Of Rs.5,57,715/-. Assessee Is A Proprietor Of Shriram Agro Plast Industries Which Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing, Trading In Drip Irrigation Systems, Plastic Products & Reprocessing Of Old Lateral Tubes.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK

Boya Ramachandra, Rachepalli Village vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Anantapur

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

ITA 1036/HYD/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1036/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Boya Ramachandra Vs. Income Tax Officer Rachepalli Village Ward 2 Anantapur A.P Anantapur Pan:Bsipr1911E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Aravindakshan, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/11/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: : Shri Aravindakshan, DR

Section 142(1)Section 498Section 69A

ITA No 1036 of 2024 Boya Ramachandra आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Santhosh Kumar Gopal, Thiruvallur vs. ITO, Ncw-17(4), Chennai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2090/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl. CIT

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

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार

Ganpatlal Agarwal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 1128/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

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

Ganpatlal Agarwal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

ITA 1127/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Ganpatlal Agarwal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

ITA 1126/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

Ganpatlal Agarwal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 1125/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

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

Rajrani Singhal, Beawar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

ITA 1124/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

Rajrani Singhal, Beawar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer

ITA 1123/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)\rFor Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)\r

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर\r IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR\r डा० एस

Rajrani Singhal, Beawar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer

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

ITA 1122/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a

Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

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