← 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)

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sp Port Maintenance Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 3895/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S. & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan & Dcit 3(3)1 Vs. Sp Port Maintenance Private Room No. 522, Aaykar Bhavan, M. Limited K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 41/44, Shapoorji Pallonji 400 020. Centre Mumbai, Colaba S.O, Pan: Aaxcs6219B Mumbai – 400 005. (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

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

Ravinder Kumar, (Deceased)(Through L/H Madhu Bala), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 55(4), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3799/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaravinder Kumar (Deceased) Vs. Ito, Through Legal Heir Madhu Bala) Ward-55(4), Room No. 205, Shiv Ashry New Delhi Senior Citizen Home, 14, Sec- 09, Rohini (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaqpk9651D

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

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

Sher Singh, Palampur vs. Income Tax Officer, Palampur

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

ITA 664/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 272A(1)(d)

Income Tax Act, 1961 has been initiated and show cause notice was issued separately. 6. In response to the notices under section 142(1) assessee has furnished details. 7. Assessee reply was considered by the Ld. AO and details so furnished were examined. 8. Cash deposit The case has been

Sh. Satwinder Mohan Sood, Fatehgarh Sahib vs. ITO, Ward-1, Mandi Gobindgarh

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

ITA 308/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253

response to the aforesaid notice dated 30/03/2018 the assessee did not file any reply nor attended the proceedings. 6. A notice under section 142(1) was issued to the assessee alongwith a questionnaire on 24/08/2018 fixing a date of personal hearing on 17/09/2018. On this date neither anybody attended

Amish Umesh Jani, Thane, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(5), Ahmedabad, Gujarat

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

ITA 864/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member ITA No. 864 /Ahd/2024 Assessment Year

Shri Kadu Satwaji Gaikwad, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Aurangabad

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

ITA 846/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.846/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Kadu Satwaji Gaikwad, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), Ns 1/14, 11Th Scheme, Near Aurangabad. Foster B. Ed College, Shivaji Nagar, Aurangabad- 431001. Pan : Ailpg9644D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.02.2024 Passed By Ld Addl./Jcit(A), Agra For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Appeal Addl/Jict(A)Agra Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs 10,40,000/— Without Considering The Material On Record Available In The First Appeal Proceeding. The Appeal Has Been Wrongly Dismissed, Which Is Not Justifiable & Is Liable To Be Set Aside By The Kind Of Interference Of This Hon’Ble Appellate Authority.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Duddu Prasad, Vizianagaram vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Vizianagaram

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

ITA 204/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.204/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Duddu Prasad Vs. Income Tax Officer C/O Prasad Traders Ward-2 Gold Star Junction Vizianagaram Jammadevipeta Vizianagaram [Pan : Ascpp2269E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम “SMC” पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी

Bright Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 96/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार

Nikunj Dhanuka, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 32, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar & Aryan Kochar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arjun Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 250(1)Section 250(6)Section 282

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE

Income Tax Officer, Itarsi vs. Nadeem Khan, Pipariya

In the result appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 37/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniito, Shri Nadeem Khan

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Pushpendra Singh Chouhan, Sehore vs. ITO-Sehore, Sehore

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 122/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Pushpendra Singh Ito Chouhan, Sehore C/O Adv.Hitesh Chimnani, Ug-37 Trade Centre, Vs. 18 South Tukoganj, Near Hotel Crown Palace, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cggps1953Q Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani, Ms. Komal Wadhwani & Komal Kataria, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

DCIT (Central), Bhopal vs. Shailendra Sharma, Bhopal

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

ITA 305/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 153A

IT(SS) No.30 & 31/Ind/2023 ITA (SS) No.305/Ind/2023 Shailendra Sharma आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME

Bhalagam Naidu Raja, Vellore vs. Iti Ward 3, Vellore

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

ITA 872/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 872/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Bhalagam Naidu Raja, The Income Tax Officer, 2/26, Melachakattu, Vs. Ward 3, Kalampathu Latheri, Vellore. Katpadi, Vellore – 632 202. Pan: Anppr 0224B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1060261821 (1) Dated 30.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Vellore For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 14.11.2019. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That The Assessee Has Raised The Ground That The Cit(A)-Nfac Has Violated The Principles Of Natural Justice In Not Allowing Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Assessee & Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Going Into The Merits Of The Case. The Relevant Grounds Raised By The Assessee I.E., Ground Nos. 2 To 4 As Under:- “2. The Nfac Erred In Not Considering The Grounds Set Forth Before The Office Of Commissioner Of Income Tax & Passed An Order U/S.250 Which Violates The Principles Of Natural Justice.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य

Sajjad Ali, Chittorgarh vs. DCIT(Intl)- Jaipur, Jaipur

ITA 459/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha (CIT-DR)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k

Suva Lal Paharia, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(3), Jaipur

ITA 157/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 144Section 147Section 5

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR श्री मनीष बोराड, लेखा

Shrey Associates, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jaipur

26. For the foregoing reasons and discussion, finding merit in the contentions raised on behalf of the assessee as regards the only challenge to the addition of Rs

ITA 127/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. M.L. MEENA, AM, SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.L. Moolchandani (I.T.P.)For Respondent: Shri Anil Dhaka (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

separate trading account for each project as desired vide letter 14 Shrey Associates vs. ACIT issued on 19.7.2019 and issuance of notice under section 142(1) of the Act issued on 11.12.2019. In his regard, response from the assessee was that it was maintaining consolidated account in respect

Idrish, Matawas vs. ITO, Ward-Bhiwadi, Income Tax

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

ITA 818/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma (Adv.) (Th.V.C.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra(Addl.CIT)
Section 147Section 2(14)Section 234A

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

Allied Computers Intl. Asia Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1198/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi (Am) I.T.A. No. 1198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17) M/S. Allied Computers Vs. Acit, Cc-2(2) Intl. Asia Limited 8Th Floor, Pratishtha Bhavan Office No. 8, 5 Th Floor M. K. Road Block A, Aidun Building. Mumbai-400 020. 1St Dhobi Talao Lane Mumbai-400 002. Pan : Aadca4412E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri R.R. Makwana Date Of Hearing 13.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 115JSection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

ITA No 1198/MUM/2023 AY 2016-17 Allied Computers Intl. Asia Limited V ACIT CC (2)92) Mumbai IN THE INCOME

Manju Hiralal Bafna, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai

ITA 1026/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon'Ble & Shri B.R. Baskaran

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 142(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, HON'BLE PRESIDENT & SHRI

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. The Sikh Educational Society, Patiala

ITA 874/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING