Section 142 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.268

Section 142 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 268 (Inquiry before assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 268 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 142 is Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another v. Income Tax Officer (308 ITR 22), cited in 74 of the 279 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 142

Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another v. Income Tax Officer
308 ITR 22 · 2009 · High Court
74
citing judgments

An assessment cannot be reopened under Section 147 after four years unless the income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Furthermore, reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer.

Kvaverner John Brown Engg. (India) P. Ltd. v. ACIT
305 ITR 103 · 2008 · Supreme Court
61
citing judgments

An intimation issued under Section 143(1)(a) cannot make adjustments for debatable issues that require detailed scrutiny, such as the disallowance of delayed employee contributions to ESI/PF. Appellate authorities also have the power to entertain fresh claims made by an assessee, even if these were not raised in the original or revised return of income.

CIT v. Lord Krishna Bank Ltd.
339 ITR 606 · 2011 · High Court
50
citing judgments

For the purpose of identifying a bank's rural branch under Explanation (ia) to Section 36(1)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, the 'place' refers to a revenue village, not a ward of a local authority like a Panchayat or Municipality. A rural branch is located in a village where the population is less than 10,000.

Canyon Financial Services Ltd. v. ITO
399 ITR 202 · 2017 · High Court
50
citing judgments

Proceedings under Section 153C are invalid if the Assessing Officer records a mechanical satisfaction note without proper application of mind, regarding seized material belonging to or pertaining to a person other than the searched person.

M/s. Mahavir Spinning Mills v. CIT
269 ITR 192 · 2004 · High Court
44
citing judgments

Assessment proceedings cannot be re-opened based solely on a change of opinion by the Assessing Officer.

CIT v. Foramer Finance
251 ITR 416 · 2001 · High Court
41
citing judgments

Reopening assessments is permissible after four years if there was an escapement of income due to the assessee's failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment, even if the initial assessment involved a change of opinion.

CIT v. Gaekwar Foam & Rubber Co. Ltd.
35 ITR 662 · 1959 · High Court
39
citing judgments

A transfer of an industrial undertaking where the ownership changes hands in reality and effectively is not considered a reconstruction. Reconstruction implies the original business continues to function and its identity is preserved.

119 (Gujarat) (HC). 4. Pushpak Bullion (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
78 Taxmann.com 58 · 2017 · High Court
37
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 require a live link and direct connection between the material that came into the possession of the Assessing Officer subsequently and the belief that income has escaped assessment. Borrowed satisfaction from another officer's belief is not sufficient.

CIT v. Elgi Finance Ltd.
286 ITR 674 · 2006 · High Court
29
citing judgments

Recourse to reassessment under section 147 beyond four years is not permissible if the circumstances for extending the limitation do not exist.

Modi Industries Ltd. v. CIT
216 ITR 759 · 1995 · Supreme Court
25
citing judgments

A tax demand subsists even if the assessment order is set aside, and the date of the original assessment remains the relevant date. This principle clarifies that tax payment methods do not alter the fundamental liability to pay tax based on an assessment order.

Judgments on Section 142

Ramchandradada Kawade Punya Nagari Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. ITO 7(1), Pune

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

ITA 379/PUN/2026[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Apr 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember I T A. No..379/Pun/2026 (A.Y.2017-18) Vs Ramchandradadakawade I.T.O.Ward 7(1), Punyanagarinagarisahakrai Aayakarsadan, . Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Bodhi Tower, S.No.66 Media Park, 548/2B, B T Kawade Road., Salasbury Park, Ghorpadi, Pune -411011 Pune-411037, Maharashtra. Maharashtra. Pan.No.Aaaap5734H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assesseeby Shri.Rajendrakadrekar&Siddheshwarhadi,Ar Revenue By Shri.Amitbobde, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 08.04.2026 17.04.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec143(3)R.W.S 263 & 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Sustaining The Denial Of Claim Of Deduction U/Sec 80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Act & Without Prejudice To Alternate/Obtaining Relief On Interest Income Earned On Deposits With The Co-Operative Banks. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under Maharashtra Societies

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80

M/S. Chatrachaya Property Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, CC-1(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1795/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1795/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Chatrachaya Property Holdings Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Studio N - Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aafcc4753J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Vinita Shah, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.05.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Besides Challenging The Issue On Merits In Restricting The Addition By The Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Has Challenged In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132ASection 153ASection 68