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

Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara, Porbandar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4), Porbandar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is partly allowed

ITA 1097/RJT/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1097/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 ] Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara, Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4) G Karavad Ni Dhar, Wadi Vistar At Vs. Porbandar Gujarat 360590 Adwana Ta/Di Porbandar Jamnagar Gujarat- 360590 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Brppk0472D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 16.04.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, Dated 06.12.2019. 2. When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, The Learned Counsel For The Assessee At The Outset Submitted That Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Belatedly By 430 Days. The Assessee Has Moved A Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Requesting The Bench To Condone The Delay, In Filing Appeal. The Learned Counsel Therefore, Adverted My Attention To The Affidavit Filed In This Regard Citing Reasons For Condonation Of Delay Bhikhu Rajshi Karavadara

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Pritiben Pravinchandra Palan, Rajkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Rajkot

In the result, both appeals filed by the different assessees in ITA

ITA 800/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 799/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Parulben Jerambhai Parsana, Income Tax Officer, Tirupati-7 "Manglam", Vs. Ward-2(2)(3), Bh. Malharhall Nr. Bram Aaykar Bhavan, Samaj, Rajkot, Gujarat-360004 Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aizpp0758R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. /Ita No. 800/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Pritiben Pravinchandra Palan, The Assistant Commissioner Of Block No. 109, Puskardham Vs. Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Rajkot. Society, University Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agbpp3207C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69ASection 80G

Parulben Jerambhai Parsana, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Rajkot

In the result, both appeals filed by the different assessees in ITA

ITA 799/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 799/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Parulben Jerambhai Parsana, Income Tax Officer, Tirupati-7 "Manglam", Vs. Ward-2(2)(3), Bh. Malharhall Nr. Bram Aaykar Bhavan, Samaj, Rajkot, Gujarat-360004 Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aizpp0758R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं. /Ita No. 800/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Pritiben Pravinchandra Palan, The Assistant Commissioner Of Block No. 109, Puskardham Vs. Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Rajkot. Society, University Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agbpp3207C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2026 12/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69ASection 80G