“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)

Jayantilal Sanghvi, Indore vs. ACIT 4(1), Indore

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 539/IND/2023[A.Y. 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Jayantilal Sanghvi, Acit, 8/10, Warehouse Road, 4(1), बनाम/ Patel Bridge, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Agtps5825Q Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, C.A. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement .06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Global Institute of Technology Society, Jaipur Rajasthan

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 175/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, (Addl.CIT)

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “B” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U

M/S. Sjs Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234B

Center ("CPC") under section 154 is bad in law as the proceedings were already initiated by the Learned Assessing Officer ("Ld. AO") under section 142(1) of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by making addition to the Income without providing an opportunity

Aquarelle India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 834/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 80J

complete scrutiny for the following reasons: a) Duty Drawback. b) Deduction from Total Income tinder Chapter Vl-A. 3.4 Subsequently various notices under section 142(1) were issued on 13.11.2020, 31.12.2020 and 13.01.2021, calling for details. The details called by the Ld.AO from time to time were furnished. The assessee

Mr. Uttamchand Jain, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 359/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri T. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115BSection 44ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

Samrudh Vividoddesha Souharda Sahakari Niyamita, Shivamogga vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5, Shivamogga

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

ITA 1085/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Samrudh Vividoddesha Souharda Sahakari Niyamita, The Income Tax 1St Floor, Belaguru Officer, Complex, Ward – 5, Durgigudi Main Road, Shivamogga. Shivamogga. Vs. Karnataka – 577 201. Pan: Aaals0413K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Varun Bhat, CA

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(19)Section 5(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18

Sri Siddeshwar Souharda Pattin Sahakari Niyamitha Vijayapura, Vijayapura vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1& Tps, Bijapur

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

ITA 1084/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Sri Siddeshwar Souharda Pattin Sahakari Niyamitha, The Income Tax Siddeshwara Road, Officer, Bijapur, Ward 1 & Tps, Vijayapura, Bijapur. Vs. Karnataka – 586 101. Pan: Aaabs1457M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Varun Bhat, CA

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(19)Section 5(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 8o

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Gemsons Precision Engineering Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in the above terms

ITA 791/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Padmavathy S. & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhanassistant Commissioner Of Income Vs. Gemsons Precision Tax – 4(2)(1) Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 640, Aayakar Bhavan, M. Plot No. Af-1, Cama Industrial K. Road, New Marine Lines, Estate, Walbhat Road, Mumbai – 400020. Goregaon East, Mumbai Pan: Aabcg0333J 400063. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ KUMAR

Angha Anand Warang, Badlapur West vs. Income Tax Officer, Kalyan West

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

ITA 266/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Income Tax Officer, Angha Anand Warang 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, D-6, Warang Niwas Bunglow, Wayle Nagar, Near Bhagwati Hospital, Rameshwadi, Khadak Pada, Vs. Badlapur West, Kalyan West, Thane-421503 Thane 421301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aizpa7610D Assessee By : Shri Anand Warang, Relative Of Assessee Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024

For Appellant: Shri Anand Warang, Relative of AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

Bank. Thus, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2019. No response was received from assessee. Notice under Section 142(1) Angha Anand Warang; A.Y. 12-13 of the Act was also issued on 26th June, 2019, which was also not responded. The learned Assessing

Naresh Mathurdas Dudhela, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai City

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

ITA 244/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Naresh Mathurdas Dudhela, Income Tax Officer C 604, 6Th Floor, Neena Sargam, 42(3)(3), Mumbai-400 Mahavir Nagar Kandivali West, Vs. Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai-400 067 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacpd9636M Assessee By : Shri Kaushik Makwana, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024

For Appellant: Shri Kaushik Makwana, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

also not reflected in the balance sheet and therefore, transaction of ₹57,30,361/- is not disclosed in the return. 03. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 18th September, 2018, which was not responded. The show cause notice under Section

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. The Cathedral Vidya Trust, Mumbai

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

ITA 3292/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri. Ronak Doshi & Ms. Mahek SavlaFor Respondent: Shri. H. M. Bhatt

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)

rent which is one of the subject matter of impugned assessment. 6. During the assessment proceeding, the AO issued show cause notice under section 142(1) seeking explanation from assessee with regard to (i) that assessee is running a Lavish International School, charging heavy fees from the students on commercial

Prateek Dev, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 972/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Prateek Dev, Vs Ito, Iii-A, 281, Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad-201010. Pan-Asmpd4867E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Raghuraj Singh, Advocate Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2024

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2012

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Anand Educational Society, Ghaziabad

In the result, for statistical purposes the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 140/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Acit Vs. Anand Educational Society Central Circle R-2/83, Sector-2, Raj Ghaziabad Nagar, Ghaziabad – 201002 Pan No.Aabta0477G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 12ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Satya Wati L/H of Late Sh. Radhay Lal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-34(6), New Delhi

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

ITA 1371/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. For the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced below:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1371/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT

Satya Wati L/H of Late Sh. Radhay Lal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 37(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 1370/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. For the sake of clarity, the same is reproduced below: “1. The appellant is an Agriculturist and has no income other than Interest on savings and term deposits in bank, during the previous relevant to assessment year under appeal.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1371/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT

Sujan Mohinder Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 2(2) Exemption, New Delhi

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sujan Mohinder Charitable Trust, Vs Ito, 8, Eastern Avenue, Ward 2(2) Exemption, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 065. Pan: Aaats7083F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Vandana Bhandari, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravi Kant Choudhary, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-40/10374/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 28.12.2019 Passed U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Ito, Exemption, Ward 2(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao). The Assessee Is A Charitable Trust Created By A Trust Deed Dated 6Th March, 2. 1978 & Is Registered U/S 12A Of The Act. The Assessee’S Case Was Picked Up For Scrutiny & The Ao Examined The Cash Deposits Of Rs.34,53,730/- During The Demonetization Period & Further Observed That During The Relevant Assessment Year No Return Has Been Filed By The Assessee Either U/S 139 Of The Act Or In Response To Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act. Accordingly, The Assessment Was Completed U/S 144 Of The Act Making An Addition Of Rs.1,22,87,399/- U/S 69A Of The Act On Account Of Following Show Cause Notice:-

For Appellant: Ms Vandana Bhandari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 10BSection 11Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND

Baboo Ram Hari Chand, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 29, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3942/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

declaring income of Rs.22,35,700/-. Subsequently, the AO initiated proceedings under Section 153C of the Act. The AO issued notice under Section 142(1) r.w. Section 143(2) of the Act which allegedly remained uncomplied with. The AO accordingly imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- for non-compliance of each ... notice issued under Section 142(1) of the Act while framing the assessment under Section 153C r.w. Section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee pointed out that the proceedings under Section 153C itself is vitiated by lack of jurisdiction and initiated without

Anil Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3651/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Group and, therefore, finally on 09.03.2021, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee followed by notice under Section 142(1) of the Act. The assessee filed its return of income pursuant to the notice issued in the proceedings initiated under Section ... notice issued to the assessee under Section 148 of the Act dated 09.03.2021 for A.Y. 2016- 17. Page 17 contains the notice under Section 142(1) of the Act issued to the assessee dated 30.11.2021 for A.Y. 2016-17. Page 19 contains the final show-cause notice to the assessee

Anil Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3650/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Hem Singh Bharana, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-29, New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the impugned penalty stand deleted

ITA 3509/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Chinu Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 271(1)(b)

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA