← 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)

Smt. Vandana Saraogi, Katni vs. PCIT(Central) Bhopal at Jaba, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 86/JAB/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2016-17 Smt Vandana Saraogi Vs. Principal Commissioner Prop. Mahalaxmi Industries, Ghantaghar, Of Income Tax (Central) Hanumanganj Ward, Katni-483222. Bhopal At Jabalpur Director General Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, 48, Arera Hills, Bhopal-462011. Pan: Asips2301L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.12.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit(Central), Bhopal At Jabalpur U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, For Short) Setting Aside The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 153A Read With Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated 22.04.2021. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT

Makson Pharma Ceuticals (India) Private Limited, Surendranagar vs. Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1232/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Lata Nivrutti Hake, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(5), Pune

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

ITA 839/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: PendingITAT Pune12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Lata Nivrutti Hake Ito, Ward 14(5), Pune S.No.36, Sitai Nagar, Hake Vasti Vs. Manjari Farm, Tal. Haveli, Dist. Pune – 412308 Pan: Aefph0748K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-12-2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

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

Nimblelogik Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2, Pune

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

ITA 2263/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2022-23 Nimblelogik Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle – 2, Pune F No.A6/103, Meghapolis, Vs. Sunway Ph-Iii, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057 Pan: Aahcn2080P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sachin P Kumar Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Sachin P KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69

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

Laxman Bhau Pawale, at Post Pirangut Mukaiwadi Pune vs. ITO Ward 2.4 Range Code 53, Pune Swarget

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

ITA 1541/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Laxman Bhau Pawale Ito, Ward 2.4, Range At Post Mukaiwadi Code 53, Pune Vs. Pirangut Taluka Mulshi, Pune – 412115 Pan: Bzlpp3421M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dinesh Sudam Kudale Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Sudam KudaleFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

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

Avva Sitarama Rao, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle- 2(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 691/HYD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153A

dated 28.03.2016, was issued and served on the assessee and the assessee had not filed his return of income. Therefore, notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, dated 21.10.2016, was issued and requested the assessee to submit the return of income and explain the contents of seized

Chandini Duvvuri, Hyderabad vs. ITO (Int Taxn)-1, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1432/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

with the prior approval of the competent authority. During the reassessment proceedings, several opportunities were provided through notices issued under Sections 142(1) and show-cause notices; however, the assessee did not respond or furnish any details. In view of the assessee’s persistent non-compliance, the A.O. proceeded

Gainsight Software Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hydersabad

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

ITA 796/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92D

case was transferred to the Regional e-Assessment Centre under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019. During the assessment proceedings, several notices under Section 142(1) of the Act were issued on 29.09.2022, 04.01.2023, 19.01.2023, and 28.07.2023, calling for details relating to business activities, ITR, financials, depreciation, ICDS compliance, TDS payments

Kasturi Medical Centre Private Limited, Joka, Thakurpukur vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income-Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 318/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manunatha G & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.318/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Kasturi Medical Centre Pvt. Ltd……………….................................……….…Appellant 5, Diamond Harbour Road, 3A Bus Stand, Joka, Thakurpukur, W.B – 700104. [Pan: Aacck1872F] Vs. Acit, Nfac, Delhi…….…………..…………….…..….......……..…...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Indernil Banerjee, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Soumitra Ghosh, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) Passed For The Assessment Year 2018–19, Whereby The Addition Of ₹85,40,911 Made By The Assessing Officer On Estimated Basis After Rejection Of Books Of Account Under Section 145(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Confirmed. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2018–19 Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,05,59,220. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under The Scrutiny Assessment Scheme, 2019, Primarily On The Issue Of Large Refund Claimed Out Of Advance Tax. Accordingly, Notices Under Section 143(2) & Section 142(1) Of The Act Along With Questionnaires Were Duly Issued & Served.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

Scrutiny Assessment Scheme, 2019, primarily on the issue of large refund claimed out of advance tax. Accordingly, notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaires were duly issued and served. I.T.A. No.318/Kol/2025 Kasturi Medical Centre Pvt. Ltd In response, the assessee furnished details

Tapas Kundu, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 61(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1819/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1819/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Tapas Kundu,………………………..……...……Appellant 237, Dumdum Park, Lake Town, North 24-Parganas, Bangur Avenue S.O., Kolkata-700055 [Pan:Afypk5224R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-61(3), Kolkata, Bamboo Villa, Kolkata-700014

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

were issued and served on the assessee electronically through e-proceeding module. The assessee was also asked by issuing notices under section 142(1) of the Act to furnish or cause to be furnished the relevant accounts and documents electronically in e-proceeding facility through his account in e- filing

Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, 4(3), Kolkata vs. Privi Exports Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1605/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata…..……………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Privi Exports Pvt. Ltd….………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Office No.2, Gf, 91A/1, Park Street, Kol-16. [Pan: Aaicp6253B] C.O. No.67/Kol/2025 (In Ita No.1605/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Privi Exports Pvt. Ltd.….……………………. ….……….……….……Cross-Objector Office No.2, Gf, 91A/1, Park Street, Kol-16. [Pan: Aaicp6253B] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata...…………………....…..…………….Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

Section 131Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

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

DCIT, Circle 13(2), Kolkata vs. Padma Logistic and Khanij Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1242/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1241 & 1242/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-13(2), Kolkata……..……………………...… ….……….……Appellant Vs. Padma Logistic & Khanij Pvt. Ltd.…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 3C, 3Rd Floor, Mukti World, 9/3B, Leelaroy Sarani, Kol– 19.. [Pan: Aaecp2189C] Appearances By: Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Subhash Agarwal, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolata vs. Padma Logistic and Khanij Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1241/KOL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1241 & 1242/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-13(2), Kolkata……..……………………...… ….……….……Appellant Vs. Padma Logistic & Khanij Pvt. Ltd.…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 3C, 3Rd Floor, Mukti World, 9/3B, Leelaroy Sarani, Kol– 19.. [Pan: Aaecp2189C] Appearances By: Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Subhash Agarwal, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

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

Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2215/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. S. Padmavathyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2214 & 2215/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 87/5, Gnt Road, Balaji Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Padiyanallur, Chennai 600 052. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Atjpr9158E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Babitha, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Dated 28.12.2023 23.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 30.03.2021 for furnishing return of income. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee on 15.11.2021 and 27.01.2022. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice in the form ... dated 30.03.2021. Further, the assessee has not at all furnished any details in response to the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 15.11.2021 & 27.01.2022 and moreover, there was no compliance against the show-cause notice issued in the form of draft assessment order proposing addition

Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2214/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. S. Padmavathyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2214 & 2215/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 87/5, Gnt Road, Balaji Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Padiyanallur, Chennai 600 052. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Atjpr9158E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Babitha, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Dated 28.12.2023 23.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 30.03.2021 for furnishing return of income. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee on 15.11.2021 and 27.01.2022. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice in the form ... dated 30.03.2021. Further, the assessee has not at all furnished any details in response to the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 15.11.2021 & 27.01.2022 and moreover, there was no compliance against the show-cause notice issued in the form of draft assessment order proposing addition

Mahanth Motors, Davangere vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1446/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 234

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL

Mahanth Motors, Davangere vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1445/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 234

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL

Techno Residency Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5742/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi & Ms. Vinita NaraFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 249Section 271(1)(b)Section 69ASection 80P

under section 148 was duly filed. 4. That subsequent to such filing, the Assessee did not receive any further communication or notice under section 142(1), section 143(2), any additional notice under section 142(1), or any show cause notice either by post or through email (vipulopticals.avi@gmail.com

Anchor Alloys (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5059/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmam/S Anchor Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. Acit 5, Village Tajpur, Central Circle-Ii Badarpur, Faridabad New Delhi – 110044 Haryana – 121001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaca1485A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

P a g e | 1 M/s Anchor Alloys (P) ltd. (AY: 2012-13) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A

Blue Breeze Trading LLP, Dlehi vs. DCIT Central Circle -27, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed in above terms for statistical purposes

ITA 5056/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

notice under section 153C of the Act despite reminder 2 Blue Breeze Trading LLP, Delhi dated 04.11.2022. Subsequently, the statutory notice under section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued to the assessee on 08.02.2023. The assessee has sought adjournment on various dates. On 04.03.2023, reply ... proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Act. However, no specific details has been filed by the assessee. Again, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 06.03.2023 was issued to which part reply dated 13.03.2023 was filed. Further, show cause notice dated 16.03.2023 and 18.03.2023 were issued