← All Phrases

“Section 207(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 207Section 207(1)2 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 207(1) is CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. (317 ITR 207), cited in 107 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 207(1)

CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd.
317 ITR 207 · 2009 · High Court
107
citing judgments

For claiming relief under Chapter VI-A deductions like Section 80IB or 80IA, the audit report in Form 10CCB is not mandatory to be filed with the return of income, but can be submitted before the assessment is completed.

Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. v. DCIT
83 TTJ 427 · 2004 · ITAT
29
citing judgments

The ITAT decision in Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. v. DCIT is authority for the proposition that no interference is called for in an impugned order when no contrary decision has been placed on record.

Trustees of Tulsidas Gopalji Charitable and Chaleswar Temple Trust v. CIT
207 ITR 368 · 1994 · High Court
28
citing judgments

Exemption under section 11 cannot be denied solely for the late filing of an audit report if the substantive conditions for the exemption are met. This case is cited in relation to the allowability of exemption under section 11.

CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta
207 CTR 115 · High Court
13
citing judgments

If an addition of undisclosed income is made solely on the basis of a statement recorded under section 132(4) without corroborating material evidence, such a statement is not conclusive, and no addition can be made.

Judgments citing Section 207(1)

Rama Damu Bhagat, Panvel vs. ITO Ward-1, Panvel

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

ITA 2109/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rama Damu Bhagat, V The Income Tax Officer, Room No.4, Yashoganga S Ward-1, Panvel. Chg, Tilak Road, Panvel – 410206. Maharashtra. Pan: Bicpb8875P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ca Ajinkya Vaishampayan(Virtual Hearing) Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2013-14 Dated 25.09.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 14.11.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :

Section 144Section 148Section 207(2)Section 207(2)(b)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 48

Thus, as per Section 207(2)(b) of the Act, for the Individual who is above the age of 60 years provisions of Section 207(1) are not applicable. In this case, Assessee is born in 1941. Therefore, at ITA No.2109/PUN/2025 [A] that point of time, Assessee was Senior Citizen

Ganesh Chhaganlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC Bengaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Preetam Kumar H. Turerao, SR. DR
Section 143(1)Section 207Section 207(2)(a)Section 234CSection 4

from other sources. As per provision of section 207(2) of the Act the liability of payment of advance tax as referred in section 207(1) of the Act shall not apply to any individual resident in India who does not have any chargeable income under the head “profits