“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, Circle-7(1), Delhi vs. Dev Rubber Factory Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 3478/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Dcit Vs Dev Rubber Factory Pvt. Ltd. Circle-7(1) 15A/13, Upper Ground Floor, Delhi East Patel Nagar, New Delhi-110008. Pan-Aafcm1581L Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Ankit Gupta, Adv. Date Of Hearing 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.05.2024 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit (A), Delhi- 3/10359/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Company Was Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Tubes For Automobile Tyres & E-Filed Its Return Of Income On 28.10.2017 Declaring Income At Inr 77,50,730/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Through Cass & Notice U/S 143(2) Was Issued On 10.08.2018. Thereafter Statutory Notice U/S 142(1) Alongwith Questionnaire Were Issued On Various Dates From Time To Time & In Response, The Assessee Has Submitted Its Replies. After Considering The Submissions Filed, Assessment Order Was Passed At An Income Of Inr 3,95,31,243/- Vide Order Dated 22.12.2019 U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Making Following Additions:- (I) Bogus Share Capital U/S 68 Inr 53,50,000/- (Ii) Addition On Account Of Rate & Taxes Inr 9,56,145/- (Iii) Addition Of Bogus Freight & Forwarding Expenses & Business Expenses Inr 59,25,588/- (Iv) Addition Of Vehicle Maintenance Expenses & Business Expenses Inr 81,89,820/-

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68

ITA No.3478/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 22(2), New Delhi, Delhi vs. Shri Harish Bahl, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2802/DEL/2024[2008]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year :2008] Dcit Vs Shri Harish Bahl Circle-22(2) D-119, Lajpat Nagar-1 New Delhi-110024. Delhi Pan-Aahpb3859K Appellant Respondent Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Assessee By Shri Nikhil Rungta Date Of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am:

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54

ITA No.2802/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B”BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Zia Rathi, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-44(3), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1881/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalmrs. Zia Rathi, Income Tax Officer, 274, Dda Flats, Sector-1A, Ward-44(3), Dwarka Nasirpur, Vs. Delhi. New Delhi-110045. Pan-Bsvpr9218M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short) Dated 27.02.2024 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi- 15/11146/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is Sole Proprietor Of M/S Veezee Traders Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Pvc Coated Imported Fabric. The Zia Rathi Vs. Ito

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi vs. Index Securities & Research Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

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

ITA 2181/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 25.09.2017. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued on 13.09.2018 asking the assessee company to furnish certain details. In response to the above notice, Sh. Lalit

Mohit Nandan Agarwal, Aligarh vs. ITO, Ward 4(1)(3), Aligarh

In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA No

ITA 484/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhwith Sa No. 03 &04/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

Prem Lata Verma, Marris Road Aligarh vs. DCIT 4(1) (1), Aligarh

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

ITA 478/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

ITO, Aligarh vs. Rashid Laloo, Aligarh

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 129/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR

Klin Industries, Sandha Khamidana, Junagadh vs. The ACIT, Circle, Junagadh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 857/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 273BSection 80J

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,राजकोट "ायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH (SMC), RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL

Tug Indofin Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 8(2), Kolkata

ITA 1914/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

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

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

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

Mange Ram, Gurugram vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 710/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Mange Ram, Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income H. No. 261, Main Pataudi Tax, Faridabad, Road, Near Hanuman Temple, Village Garoli Khurd, P.O.- Basai, Gurugram, Haryana Pan: Amwpr7462B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nian, Adv., Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, Ca Department By Ms. Amish S. Gupt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18, Arises Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [In Short, The “Pcit”], Faridabad’S Order Dated 04.12.2023 Having Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1058449758(1), Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Herd Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. We Have Given Our Thoughtful Consideration To The Assessee’S Pleadings & Revenue’S Foregoing Vehement Contention. It Emerges That This Tribunal’S Recent Decision

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 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

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Lalita Agarwal, Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5770/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Lalita Agarwal, Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5769/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Lalita Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(3), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5672/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Lalita Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(3), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5671/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Lalita Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(3), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5670/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Lalita Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(3), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5669/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Lalita Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(3), Delhi

In the result, Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5668/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, SR.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI

Asif Abdulhak Soudagar, Kumta vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Karwar, Karawar

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

ITA 145/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.145/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Asif Abdulhak Soudagar, National E – Vs Soudagar Chicken Centre, Assessment Centre, . Old Fish Market Road, Delhi-110001. Kumta, . Uttarakannada-581343, Karnataka. Pan: Diyps8481L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 144

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Balu Vithal Pawale, Pune vs. ITO WD- 2(4), Pune

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

ITA 2869/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2869/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balu Vithal Pawale, V Assessing Officer, Village-Kasarsai, S National Faceless Taluka-Mulsi, Assessment Centre, Dist-Pune – 410506. Delhi Pan:Bfcpp7170L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 08/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee 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.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 27.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 144BSection 147rSection 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

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

Kishor Vitthal Kolhe, Jalgaon vs. DCIT-Circle-1, Jalgaon

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

ITA 1876/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kawadia (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore

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

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