Section 147 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.279

Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 279 (Income escaping assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 279 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 147 is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 49,210 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 147

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

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.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

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.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

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.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

Judgments on Section 147

Lalit Kumar Srivastava, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer 6(2), Lucknow

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

ITA 640/LKW/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Aug 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2020-21 Shri Lalit Kumar Srivastava, Vs. Ito/Assessment Unit, Income House No. 7/2, C-Block, Rajajipuram, Tax Department, Lucknow Talkatora, Lucknow-226017 Pan: Arxps1950P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Smt. Pratibha Singh, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.08.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 31.03.2026, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer, That Was Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2020-21 On 28.01.2025. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “Ground No. 1-Non-Condonation Of Delay Of 254 Days: Error In Law & On Facts That The Learned Citia)/Nfac Erred In Law & On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal In Limine On The Ground Of Delay Of 254 Days Without Properly Appreciating: (A) The Bona Fide Health Issues Of The Appellant In The Period Immediately Following The Assessment Order, As Narrated In The Statement Of Facts [Annexure-5); (B) His Lack Of Technological Proficiency In Navigating Faceless Proceedings; (C) Non-Updation Of Email/Mobile On The Income Tax Portal Resulting In Non-Receipt Of Intimations; & (D) Bona Fide Reliance On A Tax Consultant Who Failed To Promptly Inform Him Of The Adverse Order All Of Which Individually & Cumulatively Constitute 'Sufficient Cause' Within The Meaning Of Section 253(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Pratibha Singh, Addl CIT DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 148ASection 253(5)Section 69

Badri Prasad Kedar Nath, Vivek Khand Lucknow vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Lucknow New, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan

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

ITA 389/LKW/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Aug 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Badri Prasad Kedar Nath, Vs. Dy/Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 1/11 Vivek Khand, Lucknow Tax-1, Lucknow New 226010, Lucknow Pan: Aadfb9505G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Shweta, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sudhakar Shukla, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 12.09.2025, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee For Statistical Purposes, That Was Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing The Order Which Is Illegal, Improper & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing The Order Without Giving Adequate Opportunity Of Being Heard & Without Considering The Written Submission Made Before Him. 3. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Failing To Adjudicate The Addition Of 77,40,914 Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 68 Of The Act In The Reassessment Order Dated 04.03.2025 Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B, Despite The Same Being Specifically Challenged By The Appellant In The Grounds Of Appeal Filed Before Him.

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sudhakar Shukla, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271ASection 68Section 69A

Urvashi Lalit, Lucknow vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Dept., NFAC

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

ITA 372/LKW/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Aug 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2019-20 Urvashi Lalit, Vs. Ito, C7/2, Rajaji Puram, Lucknow Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Pan: Amgpl6865L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Sudhakar Shukla, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 6.02.2026, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Dated 7.02.2024. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. Illegal Rejection Of Appeal On Delay That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts In Rejecting The Appeal Solely On The Ground Of Delay Of 115 Days, Without Properly Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Explaining Such Delay. 2. Failure To Condone Delay Despite Sufficient Cause That The Learned Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Appellant Had Shown Sufficient, Reasonable & Bona Fide Cause For The Delay, Which Has Not Been Found To Be False Or Mala Fide & Thus Ought To Have Condoned The Delay In Accordance With Settled Principles Of Law.

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sudhakar Shukla, DR
Section 147

DCIT, Sitapur vs. The District Cooperative Bank Lakhimpur Kheri Ltd, Lakhimpur

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

ITA 513/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Aug 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 Dcit, Sitapur V The District Cooperative Bank S. Lakhimpur Kheri Ltd., Eye Hospital Road, Sitapur, Sitapur Pan: Aacct0027B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. B.P. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Puneet Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 27.06.2025, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Dated 29.03.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case By Deleting The Addition Without Verification & Adjudication Of The Facts 2. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts Without Examining The Transaction Even After Having Co-Terminus Power With The Ao By Simply Saying That Matter Is Subject To Verification & Adjudication Which Makes The Order Perverse. 3. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts Of The Case By Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 17,59,82,190/-Made By Ao.” 2. The Facts Of The Case Are, That As Per The Information Received By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Despite The Fact That The Assessee Had Not Filed A Return

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Puneet Kumar, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148