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

Anshu Priyadarshini, Dwarka vs. Ward No. 43(4), New Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7351/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.7351/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2011-12) Anshu Priyadarshini, Flat No.532, Excellence Apartments, Plot No.4, Sector-18A, Dwarka, Delhi 110078 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Akrpp-8355-N बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-43(4), R. No. 2611, 26Th Floor, E-2 Block, Civic Centre, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Delhi 110002 अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant By : Shri Abhinarayan Mishra, Advocate प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Shri Keshav Kishore Anand, Sr. Dr सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissions Of Income Tax-(Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 18.09.2025 Confirming Penalty Levied U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), For Ay 2011-12. 2. Shri Abhinarayan Mishra, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted That The Tribunal In Assessee’S Appeal On Merits In Ita 1576/Del/2024 Vide Order 14.08.2024 Has Restored The Case Back To The Assessing Officer (Ao) For De-Novo Assessment. The Present Appeal Is In Respect Of Penalty Levied By The Ao On The Additions Made In Assessment Order Dated 15.12.2018 Passed U/S.144/147 Of The 2 Act. Since, The Assessment Order Has Been Set Aside By The Tribunal, The Penalty Proceedings Arising Therefrom Would Not Survive.

For Appellant: Shri Abhinarayan Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Keshav Kishore Anand, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 271(1)(C)

Shagun Goel, Delhi vs. CIT(A), Delhi

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

ITA 7142/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.7142/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2018-19) Shagun Goel, Flat No. 373, Sangam Apartments, West Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi 110034 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aeupg-7813-B बिाम Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), R. No. 380A Cr Building, Ip Estate, New Delhi 110002 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant By : None प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against An Ex-Parte Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.10.2025, For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. A Perusal Of The Assessment Order Shows That The Assessment In The Case Of Assessee For Ay 2018-19 Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Received, That The Assessee Has Made Bogus Purchases To The Tune Of Rs.81,95,949/- From The Alleged Shell Entity M/S. Balaji Trading Company. The Assessee Is Engaged In Trading Of Ferrous & Non-Ferrous Metals. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69C