← 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)

M/S. Raj Dev, Kotkapura vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Faridkot

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical

ITA 93/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pardeep Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Nikhil Yogi, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle Int. Taxation-3(1)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 670/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18 Nikhil Yogi, Vs. Dcit, 670, Block Gh-09, Circle- International Paschim Vihar, Taxation-3(1)(1) New Delhi – 110 087 New Delhi. Pan Abqpy8641L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

Bank Ltd., Meera Bagh, New Delhi aggregating to Rs. 53,88,380/-. The Ld. AO issued notice(s) under section 142(1) of the Act on 18.11.2019 and 28.11.2019 seeking compliance on 25.11.2019 and 05.12.2019 respectively but no compliance was made. Thereafter, the Ld. AO issued final show cause notice ... under section 142(1) on 09.12.2019 seeking compliance on or before 13.12.2019 which also remained uncomplied with. The Ld. AO therefore completed the assessment on 17.12.2019 under section 144 of the Act on total income of Rs. 62,65,980/- including therein addition of Rs. 53,88,380/- under section

M/S Mata Road Carriers, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri N.C.Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, रायपुर न्यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR श्री रविश सूद, न्याधयक सदस्य

Shree Madhi Vibhag Khand Udyog Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Bardoli vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 233/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shree Madhi Vibhag Khand Udyog Pr.C.I.T.-1 Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Room No. 123, 1St Floor, Vs. P.O. Box No. 5, At & Post- Madhi, Aayakar Bhavan, Tal: Bardoli, Surat-394340. Majuragate, Surat. Pan: Aaaas 4732 J Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

operative bank. The issue was extensively examined by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings by issuing specific show cause notice under Section 142(1) dated 18/12/2020. In the said notice the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the details of interest and dividend income earned from other

Dhirubhai R. Patel, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward-2, Navsari

ITA 190/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.190/Srt/2019 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Physical Court) Dhirubhai R Patel Income Tax Officer, Balwada, Hond, Taluka : Ward-2, Navsari Vs Chikli, Navsari-396521 Pan No: Bsepp 9971 J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 10.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals),Valsad [For Short To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.01.2019 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 28.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Reopening The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act After Issuing Notice U/S 148. Dhirubhai R Patel 2. Even Otherwise The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Passing The Order U/S 147 By Making The Addition When He Did’Nt Make Any Addition On Issues Pertaining To The Reasons Recorded U/S 148(2) Of I.T. Act.

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 2(14)Section 254(1)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI

Bani Medical Enterprises, Amritsar vs. Principal Commisioner of Income Tax -1, Amritsar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 78/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

I.T.A. No. 78/Asr/2022 1 Assessment Year: 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M

Pingash Home Appliances Private Limited, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 106/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena and Shyam Sunder, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ram Dhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(2)Section 251(1)Section 271Section 56Section 56(2)Section 68

establish the identity and creditworthiness and genuineness in respect of the share applicants. In reference to show-cause- notice dated 07.12.2018 issued under Section 142(1) of the Pingash Home Appliances Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2016-17 \ Act, he observed that no explanation has been furnished by the assessee. He thus

Shri Amarjeet Singh Bhatia, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations hereinabove

ITA 63/RPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

objected to within a month by the assessee calling in question the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer after issuance of notice under section 142(1)/143(2). In that scenario, the order passed thereafter is protected on the question of jurisdiction. In the present case, I.T.A No. 266 to 269/Agra/2013

M/S. R C Heights Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot vs. The ITO/ADIT NFAC Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 90/RJT/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot07 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 37Section 37(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And

Shri Rajnikant Hargovinddas Sanadia, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward-2 (3)(5), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 272/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot07 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 274

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And

Shri Rajnikant Hargovinddas Sanadia, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward-2 (3)(5), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 271/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot07 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 274

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And

Mr. Anthony P Lewis, Mumbai vs. ITO-22(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1813/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe &For Respondent: Smt Sailja Rai
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 54

giving properties on a lease. The Assessee did not file return of income for the Assessment Year 2009-10. Therefore, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the Appellant on 22.07.2011. In response, the Appellant filed return of income for the Assessment Year ... assessment for the Assessment Year 2009-10 was provided to the Appellant by the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 03.07.2012. Thereafter, notice under Section 142(1) and 143(2) were issued and served on the Appellant. Vide order dated 30.03.2014, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section

Shri Vijay Kumar Singhla, Mansa vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar

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

ITA 100/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

DCIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Rohit Bansal, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2178/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 2178/Del/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18)

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Neorem, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 292BSection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH

Dhansukhlal Maganlal Dhangar, Na vs. Arivs.Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Navsari

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 247/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Dhansukhlal Maganlal Dhangar, I.T.O., Shantinagar Society, Ranifaliya, Ward-2, Vs. Vansda, Navsari-396580 (Gujarat) Navsari. Pan No. Acypd 0673 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 270ASection 274Section 80T

statement of fact. In the statement of fact, the assessee contended that during the assessment, the assessee filed response to the notices under Section 142(1) of the Act and explained the facts in detail. On the addition of interest income of Rs. 42,550/-, the assesse stated that

National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Exemption, Circle-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeal filed by the assessee for AY

ITA 756/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Respondent: Shri S. Ananthan & Ms. Lalitha
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250Section 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeal filed by the assessee for AY

ITA 755/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Respondent: Shri S. Ananthan & Ms. Lalitha
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250Section 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

National Institute of Bank Management, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Exemption, Circle-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and both the appeal filed by the assessee for AY

ITA 754/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Respondent: Shri S. Ananthan & Ms. Lalitha
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250Section 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Kala Ramesh Parmar, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward- 23(2)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 581/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalekala Ramesh Parmar Ito Ward – 23(2)(6), 2/21,Kishorebuilding, Room No.303, बनाम/ Opp Edward Cinema, 3Rd Floor, Vs. 2Nd Floor, 521, Earnest House, Kalbadevi Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400002. Mumbai- 400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadpp6229M (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri.Jitendra Singh.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Abhishek Kumar Singh, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 68

after the Petitioner had filed the initial return of income on 20-9-2012, Assessing Officer had issued notice to the Petitioner under section 142(1) of the Act dated 7-8-2013, calling upon the Petitioner to produce the following documents :- "1. Reasonably detailed note on the nature ... evidence on which it relied upon in support of the return filed. 25. On 10-6-2014 Assessing Officer issued another notice under section 142(1) of the Act, calling upon the Petitioner to submit the particulars mentioned therein including the details regarding increased authorized share capital with the list

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Saini Industries Limited, Raipur

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

ITA 152/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, रायपुर न्यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR श्री रविश सूद, न्याधयक सदस्य