“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)

Nidhi Rani, Panipat vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Panipat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3323/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Smt. Nidhi Rani Vs Ito 1361, Sector-25, Part-Ii Ward-1, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Panipat Pan-Arrpr9400P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2025 Order

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 68

ITA No.3323/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI

Shring Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Muzaffarnagar

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

ITA 7056/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh, Hon’Blea.Y. : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

without reasonable cause failed to comply with a notice under section 22(4)/23(2) of Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 or under section 142(1)/143(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961. * have concealed the particulars of such income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income.” 6.1 After perusing

Sarif, Jalesar Etah vs. Assessing Officer, Ward-4(3)(1), Etah

In the result, both the appeals ITA Nos

ITA 464/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

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

Sarif, Jalesar, Etah vs. Assessin Officer, Ward-4(3)(1), Dinesh Nagar Etah

In the result, both the appeals ITA Nos

ITA 463/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

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

Bhoj Raj, Agra vs. Ward 1(1)(1), Agra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 436/AGR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (SMC) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017

Anil Kumar Mandal, Fatehpur, Sahibganj vs. ITO, Sahibganj

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 461/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.461/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Anil Kumar Mandal.. …………….…….…............................……….……Appellant Fathepur, Balapokhar Rajmahal, Jharkhand-816109. [Pan: Bkhpm1302H] Vs. Ito, Sahibganj……………….....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri R R Mittal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 18, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 23.10.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Based On Information Available With The Assessing Officer, It Was Found That The Assessee Had Deposited Cash Amounting To ₹44,73,800 In A Savings Bank Account During The Relevant Assessment Year. On Account Of Such Cash Deposits, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 After Recording Reasons & Obtaining The Necessary Approval From The Competent Authority. Consequently, Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act Was Issued To The Assessee For Filing The Return Of Income. However, The Assessee Did Not File The Return Of Income Nor Complied With The Notices Issued Under Section 142(1) Of The Act. In The Absence Of Any Compliance, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex Parte & Treated The Entire Cash Deposit Of ₹44,73,800 In The Savings Bank Account As

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

filing the return of income. However, the assessee did not file the return of income nor complied with the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act. In the absence of any compliance, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte and treated the entire cash deposit

Assam Valley Finance and Investment Pvt Ltd, Guwahati vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 1, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Assam Valley Finance & Dcit, Circle 1 Investment Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, House No.1, Niligiri Path, G.S Road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Zoo Road, Guwahati-781024 Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca6974B Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (Through Virtual Hearing at Kolkata) BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND

Sunil Kumar, Lakhisarai vs. ITO, Ward 2(5), Lakhisari, Lakhisarai

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/PAT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.472 & 473/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2019-20 Sunil Kumar……….…….………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant Rampur, Lakhisarai, Bihar – 811311. [Pan: Avipk3853A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(5), Lakhisarai……………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Rastogi, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2019-20 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 22.08.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.472/Pat/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri

Sunil Kumar, Lakhisarai vs. ITO, Ward 2(5), Lakhisarai

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 472/PAT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri

Mangamma Chirumamilla, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 151/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री संदीप ससह करहेल, माननीय न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री ओम्कारेश्वर यिदरा

Reshma Mohmad Suhed Sindhi, Anand vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Anand, Anand

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

ITA 687/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Panchal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Kewalram Textiles Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1076/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Limited, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1653/AHD/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, Advocate and Shri Jimi Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “D”,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR BRR KUMAR

Gujarat State Electricity Corpn. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1596/AHD/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Dec 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1596/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, Advocate and Shri Jimi Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)

Sameer Chandrakant Dugane, Pune, Maharashtra vs. Ward (6), Pune

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

ITA 815/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Shahakar

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Pradeep Janardhan Sakhare, Sambhajinagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(A), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2509/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2509/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pradeep Janardhan Sakhare, Ito, Ward – 1(1), Ashay Regency, Flat No. 9, Aurangabad New Vishal Nagar, Chh. Sambhajinagar, Vs. Maharashtra-431001 Pan : Bobps8283M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi (Virtual) Department By : Smt. Indira R. Adakil Date Of Hearing : 04-12-2025 Date Of 18-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.09.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2018-19. 2. Briefly Stated The Facts Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. For Ay 2018-19, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Income Of Rs.3,17,830/-. Based On The Information Received From The Insight Portal Under „High Risk Criu/Vru Information‟, It Was Found That The Assessee Has Done Transaction In Crypto Currency Of Rs.38,54,500/-, The Source Of Which Requires Verification & Also There Were Unexplained Credit Entries Aggregating To Rs.40,44,044/-. As The Assessee Failed To Disclose The Above Transaction In The Itr Filed For The Ay 2018-19, The Ld. Assessing Officer (“Ao”) Had Reason To Believe That The Above Income In Ay 2018-19 Has Escaped Assessment. Accordingly, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) Dated 07.04.2022. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 09.06.2023. Statutory Notice(S) U/S 142(1) & 144 Were Then Issued To The Assessee. As The Assessee Failed To File Any Compliance

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. Rathi (Virtual)For Respondent: Smt. Indira R. Adakil

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 69ASection 69B

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

Sushil Mitruka, Siliguri vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2178/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

Burdwan Satgachia Janakalyan Society, Memari, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Burdwan

ITA 1854/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Burdwan Satgachia Janakalyan Ito Ward 1(1) Society, Aaykar Bhawan, Court Satgachia, Memari, Burdwan, Compound, Burdwan, Vs. West Bengal-713422 West Bengal-713101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaab8302K Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 69ASection 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Burdwan

Sushil Mitruka, Darjeeling vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1631/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

Sushil Mitruka, Darjeeling vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals

ITA 1630/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM