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

Hemani Deepak Patel, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5790/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjeet Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5790/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Hemani Deepak Patel Ito-19(3)(2), बनाम/ 159-B, Lalita Sadan, Room No. 306, Piramal Chambers, S. V. Road, Bandra (W), Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012 Vs. Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpp 3864 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nihar H. Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Satyanarayana Raju सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 29.6.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 15.7.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 27.6.2014, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) R/W S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2005-06 Vide Order Dated 01.3.2013. 2. The Assessee Not Pressing Her Ground # 1 (Qua Reopening Of Assessment U/S. 148 Of The Act), The Only Issue Arising In This Appeal Is The Addition U/S. 68/69 In The Sum Of Rs.15.40 Lacs On Account Of Unexplained Cash Deposits Made In Her Bank

For Appellant: Shri Nihar H. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Satyanarayana Raju
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Procyon Offshore Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(1), Mumbai

ITA 4951/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4951 & 4952/Mum/2012, आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 & 2005-06 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Dolphin Offshore Shipping Ltd. Acit, -5(1) Mumbai. (Formerly Known As M/S. Procycon Offshore Services P.Ltd.),Lic Bldg. Plot No.54, Vs. Sector-Ii,Cbd-Belapur-400 614. Pan:Aaacp 2682 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni-Dr Assessee By: Shri M. Subramanian-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम िधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर िधिनयम िधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Orders,Dated 20/04/2012, Of The Cit (A)-9,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Two Assessment Years(Ay.S.)Raising Various Grounds Of Appeals.Considering The Fact That The Issues Involved In Both The Cases Are Almost Identical, We Are Adjudicating Both Appeals By Single Order.The Details Of Filing Of Returns, Returned Incomes & Assessed Incomes Etc., Can Be Summarised As Under: A.Y. Roi Filed On Returned Assessment Dt. Assessed Cit(A) Order Dt. Income(Rs.) Income(Rs.) 2004-05 25.10.2004 Nil 24.12.2009 1,05,47,180/- 20.04.2012 2005-06 28.10.2005 Nil 24.12.2009 95,910/- 20.04.2012

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian-ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni-DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 254(1)Section 37