← All Phrases

“Section 139(10)”

Section References (mined)Section 139Section 139(10)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 139(10) is CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (43 Taxmann.com 411), cited in 524 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 139(10)

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Jai Steel (India) v. ACIT
259 CTR 281 · 2013 · High Court
224
citing judgments

Under Section 153A, for completed assessments (under Section 143(1) or 143(3)) where no incriminating material is found during a search under Section 132, the Assessing Officer cannot make additions to the income already assessed. Additions are only permissible if based on undisclosed income or assets discovered during the search.

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.
376 ITR 456 · 2015 · Supreme Court
221
citing judgments

The requirement to file a certificate or form (e.g., Form 10CCB, 10-IC) along with the return of income for claiming a deduction (e.g., under sections 80-IB, 115BAA) is directory regarding its timing. Such a deduction is allowable if the requisite form is filed before the final order of assessment, as procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits.

CIT v. Kasturi & Sons Ltd.
3 SCC 346 · 1999 · Supreme Court
153
citing judgments

Fiscal statutes must be construed strictly and literally. When the language is plain and unambiguous, courts must give effect to it without considering legislative intent or equitable considerations.

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT
372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

CIT v. ITI Ltd.
313 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
142
citing judgments

An employer is not statutorily obligated to collect evidence from employees regarding the actual utilization of amounts paid towards leave travel concession or conveyance allowance, unless specific requirements are mandated by law or a CBDT circular.

CIT v. St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles
70 Taxmann.com 234 · 2016 · High Court
134
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, the Assessing Officer has the power to assess or reassess the income of an assessee for the six assessment years immediately preceding the search. This power extends to both previously assessed and unassessed income within this period.

Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT
224 ITR 310 · 1997 · Supreme Court
121
citing judgments

A charitable educational institution or trust does not lose its charitable character merely because it generates a surplus, provided its primary object remains charitable and it does not operate for profit. The assessment of charitable nature should focus on the institution's objects rather than the quantum of surplus generated.

Judgments citing Section 139(10)