“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)

Rajendra Rampal, Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 23(1), Hooghly

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

ITA 2167/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT

Tirupati Marbles, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2126/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2025AY 2010-2011

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

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

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

M/S. Kanak Projects Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1219/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmam/S Kanak Projects Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata Salarpuria Jajodia @ Co.7, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kol-72. Pan No. : Aabck1255F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : This Appeal By The Assessee Arises Against The Order Dated 09.04.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration Declaring A Total Income Of ₹99906480. The Assessee Subsequently Filed A Revised Return Declaring The Same Income. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Statutory Notices Under Section 142(1) Were Served. In Response, The Assessee Filed Audited Financial Statements, Computation Of Income, Details Of Receipts & Expenses & Explanations As Called For. From The Tax Audit

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

assessee subsequently filed a revised return declaring the same income. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under section 142(1) were served. In response, the assessee filed audited financial statements, computation of income, details of receipts and expenses, and explanations as called for. From the tax audit

Mitsui & Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-2(2)(1)(International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5662/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Kumar Jatav, SR. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN

Mariappan Austin Prakash, Bengaluru, Kanrnataka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Intl Txn Circle, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 89/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 195Section 9(1)(i)

observed that as per Form 26AS assessee has claimed a TDS amount of Rs.86,26,842/-. Thereafter, a questionnaire under section 142(1) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee to provide the period of stay in India and the assessee in response submitted that

Raghavamma V Thatipatti, West Godavari Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 610/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the information furnished by the assessee, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 44ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री रवीश सूद, माननीय न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, माननीय

Mandala Sriramachandra Murthy, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 606/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Raghava Sastry Kalyani Renduchintala, Eluru vs. ITO, Delhi

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

ITA 6/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

148A(d) of the Act on 30.03.2023 and issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on 30.03.2023. Thereafter, statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued on various dates calling for information. The assessee failed to respond to any of the notices

Dasari Sai Annapurna L/R of Late Dasari Gopi Krishna Reddy, Vijayawada vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 583/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.583/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16) Dasari Sai Annapurna Vs. Assistant Commissioner L/R Of Late Dasari Gopi Of Income Tax, Krishna Reddy, Central Circle-2(1), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aeipd0990C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 27/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 08/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 R.W.S 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28/03/2022, For The Assessment Year 2015-16. The 2 Dasai Sai Annapurna L/R Of Late Dasari Gopi Krishna Reddy Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 45Section 54F

with the said notice and did not file his return of income within the stipulated time period, therefore, the AO issued notices under section 142(1) of the Act, which too were not responded by the assessee. Also, the reference made by the AO to the designated Verification Unit

The Chodavaram Co Operative Sugars Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 543/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO after perusing the details furnished by the assessee observed that the assessee has paid bonus amount of Rs.1,27,03,496/- during the F.Y.2017-18 on various dates from April 2017 to September 2017. The Ld.AO observed that generally, bonus is declared during Diwali season and paid accordingly and therefore, concluded that the bonus amount of Rs.1,27,03,490 does not pertain to the impugned assessment year and therefore disallowed the same.

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

Seelamsetty Balaji, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 508/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

section 148(d) of the Act dated 11.03.2024 and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 11.03.2024. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 24.07.2024 requesting the assessee to furnish information regarding the sources and details of business and other activities. Assessee ... also furnished information regarding the sale of property before the Ld. AO. After perusing the information furnished by the assessee, another notice under section 142(1) of the Act was again issued on 02.12.2024 to furnish the necessary supporting documentary evidences. Thereafter show-cause notice was also issued

Satyanarayana Koduru, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudiwada

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

ITA 491/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.491/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Satyanarayana Koduru, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Krishna District. Ward-1, Pan:Altpk1048C Gudiwada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 02/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member

Venkata Ramana Goda, Visakhapatnam vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 489/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.489/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Ramana Goda, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Pan: Abzpg3216A Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 17/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 06/08/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 08/03/2025. The 2 Venkata Ramana Goda Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 2(14)(iii)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

Go Iron Marketing, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3), Vishakapatnam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee firm is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 483/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.483/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Go Iron Marketing, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(3), Pan: Aanfg6474D Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, Ca (Hybrid Hearing) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 03/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Firm Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 26/07/2025 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 01/02/2024 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. The 2 Go Iron Marketing Vs. Ito

For Appellant: Mrs. K. Hemalatha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250

file its return of income in response thereto. 3. As the assessee firm failed to comply with the notices issued by under section 142(1) of the Act, therefore, the AO was constrained to proceed with and frame the assessment to the best of his judgment under section

No 368 Kolakaluru Primary Agricultural Co Operative Credit Society Limited, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tenali

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee society is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 456/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.456/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2019-20) No.368 Kolakaluru Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Ward-1, Credit Society Limited, Tenali. Tenali. Pan: Aaban6994Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 04/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Society Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 08/07/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Madina Rasool Shaik, Guntur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Narasaraopet

ITA 422/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.422/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Madina Rasool Shaik, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Guntur. Ward-1, Pan: Ahfpr3787D Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 01/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 271ASection 69A

accounts, but had not filed his return of income within the “due date” specified under section 139 of the Act, issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act, dated 23/11/2017. Also, the AO issued a letter, dated 06/06/2019 calling for certain information from the assessee regarding the cash transactions

Indira Rani Mulpuri, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 134/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal, Which Caused The Delay. She Further Submitted That The Delay Was Neither Intentional Nor Deliberate, Therefore, Pleaded To Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing In The Interest Of Justice.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

Vivek Industries, Vijayawada vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada

ITA 133/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.133/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Vivek Industries, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 8-1, Kamayyathopu Kanuru, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aanfm5215A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 150Section 54DSection 54F

assessment” for verifying its claim for deduction of “capital gains”. 3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act, which was replied by the assessee. On a perusal of the submissions filed by the assessee firm, it was observed

Andhra Paper Limited, Rajahmundry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 349/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.349/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2020-21) Vs. Acit – Circle -1 Andhra Paper Limited 14-6-9, Admin Office Veerabhadrapuram Kateru Road Rajahmundry-533101 Sri Ramnagar S.O. (Rajahmundry) Andhra Pradesh Rajahmundry (Urban) East Godavari – 533105 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaact8849D]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

pulp manufacturer. Subsequently, notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 29.06.2021. Consequent to scrutiny, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 28.10.2021 containing the detailed questionnaire. In response, assessee made various submissions on 13.07.2021 and 09.12.2021. The case was thereafter

A & B Associates, Thiruvananthapuram vs. The Income Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram

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

ITA 643/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by directing the AO to -

For Appellant: Shri Lokanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Sr. D/R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH,COCHIN BEFORESHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL