← All Phrases

“Section 143(1)(v)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)(v)11 judgments

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), C.R BUILDING, I.P ESTATE, NEW DELHI vs. MD EQUIPMENT PVT. LTD. , INTERNATIONAL TRADE TOWER NEHRU PLACE, SOUTH DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3523/DEL/2025[2023]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2026
Section 10ASection 115JSection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(v)Section 44A

Report u/s 44AB\nin time on 30.09.2023.\n3.\nAt the time of hearing, ld. DR of the Revenue submitted that the\nprovisions of section 143(1)(v) prohibits the claim when the assessee\nfailed to submit the relevant form within time of filing return of income.\nHe relied

DEEPA JHUNJHUNWALA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 127/GTY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and thereafter aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:

Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY

DEEPA JHUNJHUNWALA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 126/GTY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) and thereafter aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds:

Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY

PAHALAMPUR SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD., ,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WARD 23(1), , HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 887/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Pahalampur Samabay Krishi Ito, Ward-23(1), Hooghly Unnayan Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 153ASection 80Section 80P

made effective by the Finance Act 2021 from A.Y. 2021-22 whereas the present case concerns A.Y. 2019-20 where such amendment to Section 143(1)(v) of the Act authorising such denial was not in place. Learned Counsel also referred to the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal

AJINKYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK SEVAK SAH. PATSANSTHA, MARYADIT,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SATARA, SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2214/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: \nShri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

made\neffective by the Finance Act 2021 from A.Y. 2021-22 whereas the present\ncase concerns A.Y. 2019-20 where such amendment to Section 143(1)(v) of\nthe Act authorising such denial was not in place. Learned Counsel also\nreferred to the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD.,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ACIT, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 351/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2019-20 Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Acit Sitapur/Cpc, V. Limited Income Tax Deptt., C/O Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj, Bengaluru-560500. Lakhimpur Kheri, U.P.-241001. Pan:Aawfs0887P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26 11 2024

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

made effective by the Finance Act 2021 from A.Y. 2021-22 whereas the present case concerns A.Y. 2019-20 where such amendment to Section 143(1)(v) of the Act authorising such denial was not in place. Learned Counsel also referred to the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal

SHREE SHIV SAHYADRI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(3) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1788/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shree Shiv Sahyadri Nagari V The Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Pathanstha S Ward-7(3), Pune. Maryadit, Sai Park Road, Dighi, Pune – 411015. Pan: Aaeas1417N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Deepak Sasar – Ar Revenue By Smt. Shabana Parveen – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.06.2024 For A.Y.2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Wrongly Confirmed The Disallowance Of Deduction Of Rs.15,60,115/- Claimed By The Appellant U/S.80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Alternatively, The Interest Income Earned By The Appellant From The Investments In A Co-Operative Bank Is Also Eligible For Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(D) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Appellant Crave Leave To Add, Delete, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw All Or Any One Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal.”

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 2Section 250Section 80ISection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

assessee’s Return of Income was not filed within the due date. However, there is no provision u/sec.143(1) for any such disallowance. Section 143(1)(v) specifically refers to section 80IA, 80IAB, 80IB, 80IC, 80ID, 80IE. Thus, there is no reference to section 80P in the Section 143(1

PATRIC JOHN,TIRUVALLUR vs. ACIT, ALAPPUZHA

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 452/COCH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhpatric John Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 225, F-2, 6Th Street Income Tax Modern City, Pattabiram Alappuzha Vs. Poonamallee Tiruvallur 600072 [Pan: Afapj9149Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

return u/s.139(1) of the Act. So far as the assessee’s latter argument that the impugned disallowance could not be made in section 143(1)(v)(a) “processing”, case law [2024] 298 Taxman 159 (Bom.) (HC) Rohan Korgaonkar vs. DCIT has rejected the very stand. 4. We accordingly

MURALEEDHARAN KALATHIL,COCHIN vs. ACIT, KOCHI

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 449/COCH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhmuraleedharan Kalathil Assistant Commissioner Of 9F Sai Sree Ram Prakash Vihar Income Tax Awho, Ernakulam Vs. Cochin Cochin 682023 [Pan: Afhpk6833P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)

return u/s.139(1) of the Act. So far as the assessee’s latter argument that the impugned disallowance could not be made in section 143(1)(v)(a) “processing”, case law [2024] 298 Taxman 159 (Bom.) (HC) Rohan Korgaonkar vs. DCIT has rejected the very stand. 4. We accordingly

SAHAKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO-2(5) CHANDAUSI, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2090/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Pradip Kumar Kediasahakari Ganna Vikas Vs. Ito-2(5), Samiti, Sikri Gate Chandausi Chandausi, Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh-244 412 Pan No. Aaaaf 1459 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Adv. Revenue By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 19.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.07.2023

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(v)Section 154Section 80ASection 80P

made effective by the Finance Act 2021 from A.Y. 2021-22 whereas the present case concerns A.Y. 2019-20 where such amendment to Section 143(1)(v) of the Act authorising such denial was not in place. Learned Counsel also referred to the judgement of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal

BATAVA DEVLI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,BATAVA DEVLI, TAL. KUNLAVA, DIST. AMRELI. vs. THE ADIT, (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)Section 143(1)(v)Section 250Section 80Section 80A

dismissed assessee’s appeal with the following observations: “Assessee in it's ground of appeal claims that as per section 143(1)(v) of the IT Act, " provisions of Sec. 143(1)(a)(v) do not provide for denial of deduction u/s 80P of the Act when the return ... objection is filed I.T.A No. 314/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2019-20 Page No 4 Batava Devli Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd. vs. ADIT (CPC) against section 143(1 )(v) of the IT Act and both do not have direct linkage, hence, Ground 1 is dismissed. Further to analyse the grounds of appeal