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

Gandavarapu Sathyanarayana Reddy, Chennai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 8(2), Chennai

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

ITA 55/CHNY/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Honourable Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 55/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2012-13 Gandavarapu Sathyanarayana Reddy, V. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.B-1, Plot No.258, Rajiv Nagar, Non-Corp Ward-8(2), Pillaiyar Koil Street Extn., Pallikuppam, Chennai. Ayyapakkam, Chennai-600 077. [Pan: Aqmpr4401J] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. R. S. Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate, Ld. Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. Guru Prasad, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) / Nfac, (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’) Dated 15.12.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ay’) 2012-13. Grounds Of Appeal

For Appellant: Mr. R. S. Lakshmi NarayanaFor Respondent: Mr. Guru Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 271Section 271(1)

Abc Connects, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee are allowed

ITA 44/CHNY/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Honourable Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 44/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2014-15 Abc Connects, V. The Income Tax Officer, No.27/33, Thendral Nagar, Ward-1, Near Annai Sathya Nagar, Erode. Palayapala, Erode Collectorate S.O, Erode, Tamil Nadu-638 011. [Pan: Aaofa1397A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode), Ld. Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Guru Prasad, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) / Nfac, (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’) Dated 12.11.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ay’) 2014-15. Grounds Of Appeal 1) The Impugned Order Is Unjust, Unreasonable & Bad In Law. 2) The Learned First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Considering The Scope & Effect Of The First Proviso To Sec. 147, As Nothing Discernible From The Assessment Order As To The Proviso Mentioned Above. 3) The Learned First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Considering The Reasons Recorded & The Corresponding Satisfaction Of The Revenue, Which Speak Volumes About The Fact That The Above Proviso Was Not Followed At All.

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Mr.Guru Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151(1)

Elangeswaran, Neyveli vs. AO, Ward - 2, Cuddlaore

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the AO is directed to verify the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee

ITA 211/CHNY/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Honourable Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 211/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2012-13 Elangeswaran, V. The Income Tax Officer, 5B/28 Businessman Street, Ward-2, Mandharakuppam, Neyveli, Cuddalore. Tamil Nadu-607 802. [Pan: Aajpe0977H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Elangeswaran, Ld. Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. Chilaka Marthi Vijay Raju, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Addl. / Jcit(A)-1, (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ld. Cit (A)’), Visakhapatnam Dated 19.08.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ay’) 2012-13. Grounds Of Appeal

For Appellant: Mr. Elangeswaran, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chilaka Marthi Vijay Raju
Section 139Section 148Section 271(1)Section 68Section 69A