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

Sadhana Singh, Ranchi vs. Assessing Officer, Ranchi

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

ITA 321/RAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi16 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2020-21 Sadhana Singh. …………………………..……………………………...Appellant Flat-2C, Block-A, Spring Valley Phase-One, Lower Burdwan Compound Ranchi, Jharkhand-834001 [Pan: Igeps9314F] Vs. A.O. Ward 3(1), Ranchi………….………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances By: Shri Harsh Verma, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 13, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 16, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.08.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual, Did Not File Her Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2020–21. Based On The Specific Information Available With The Income Tax Department, It Was Observed That The Assessee Had Purchased Immovable Property During The Year For A Total Consideration Of Rs. 62,11,100/-. Accordingly, Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued Requiring The Assessee To File Her Return Of Income, However, No Return Was Filed. Subsequently, Notice U/S 142(1) Was Issued, But The Assessee Failed To Comply. Further Sadhana Singh Notices Were Issued Which Remained Uncompiled With. In View Of The Persistent Non-Compliance, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Act. The Assessing Officer Treated The Sum Of Rs. 62,11,100/- As Unexplained Investment U/S 69A Of The Act. Further, A Sum Of Rs. 6,14,000/- Was Also Added To The Income Of The Assessee & The Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Rs. 68,25,100/-.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Sail Employees Cooperative Housing Society, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi

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

ITA 318/RAN/2025[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi16 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2014-15 Sail Employees Cooperative Housing Society………………………...Appellant Sunaina Khaitan, Savitri Enclave Karamtoli, Ranchi, Jharkhand-834001 [Pan: Aahas8163J] Vs. Dcit, Cirlce-1, Ranchi………….………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances By: None, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 13, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 16, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.07.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 As Required U/S 139 Of The Act. Subsequently, Information Was Received By The Department That The Assessee Had Entered Into Transaction Involving Sale Of Immovable Property Aggregating Of Rs.39,39,72,325/- Comprising Of Two Properties Sold At Rs.31,04,28,281/- & 08,35,44,044/- Respectively. Based On Such Information Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued Calling Upon The Assessee To File Its Return Of Income, However, There Was No Compliance Sail Employees Cooperative Housing Society From The Assessee. Thereafter, Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued But The Assessee Again Failed To Respond. In View Of The Persistent Non-Compliance, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex-Parte U/S 147 R.W.S 144 & 144B Of The Act, Determining The Total Long Term Capital Gain Of Rs.39,39,72,325/-

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250