← All Phrases

“Section 143(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)13,466 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)

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.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

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.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

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.

Judgments citing Section 143(1)

Late Sh Bhagat Chajju Ram Memorial Trust, Jammu vs. ITO Exemption, Jammu

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 499/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

indifference but was caused by a genuine and reasonable belief that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) superseded the intimation under Section 143(1). This belief was based on the procedural complexity involved in understanding the legal consequences of the two orders. It is humbly submitted that there

Late Sh Bhagat Chajju Ram, Jammu vs. ITO Exemption Jammu, Jammu

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 498/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

indifference but was caused by a genuine and reasonable belief that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) superseded the intimation under Section 143(1). This belief was based on the procedural complexity involved in understanding the legal consequences of the two orders. It is humbly submitted that there

Late Sh Bhagat Chajju Ram Memorial Trust, Jammu vs. ITO, Jammu

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 497/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

indifference but was caused by a genuine and reasonable belief that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) superseded the intimation under Section 143(1). This belief was based on the procedural complexity involved in understanding the legal consequences of the two orders. It is humbly submitted that there

Pranay Mahajan Welfare Trust, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer- Ward 2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 461/ASR/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 143(1)Section 250

Bengaluru has got the power to compute the correct amount of tax and same payable by the assessee in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and he prayed that the order of the ld. first appellate authority may please be upheld. 9 I.T.A

Pranay Mahajan Welfare Trust, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 460/ASR/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 143(1)Section 250

Bengaluru has got the power to compute the correct amount of tax and same payable by the assessee in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and he prayed that the order of the ld. first appellate authority may please be upheld. 9 I.T.A

Pranay Mahajan Welfare Trust, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 459/ASR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 143(1)Section 250

Bengaluru has got the power to compute the correct amount of tax and same payable by the assessee in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and he prayed that the order of the ld. first appellate authority may please be upheld. 9 I.T.A

Pranay Mahajan Welfare Trust, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 458/ASR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 143(1)Section 250

Bengaluru has got the power to compute the correct amount of tax and same payable by the assessee in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and he prayed that the order of the ld. first appellate authority may please be upheld. 9 I.T.A

Pranay Mahajan Welfare Trust, Medical Enclave vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -2(1), Amritsar

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

ITA 457/ASR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 143(1)Section 250

Bengaluru has got the power to compute the correct amount of tax and same payable by the assessee in terms of provisions of section 143(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and he prayed that the order of the ld. first appellate authority may please be upheld. 9 I.T.A

Harbans Singh, P.O. Khera Dona vs. Income Tax Officer, Bsnl Exchange Colony

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 236/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rajnish Mohindra, Adv
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH

Halima Adamji Medical and Education Charitable Trust, Surat vs. CIT, (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 764/SRT/2025[2025-26]Status: HeardITAT Surat26 Sept 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.764/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 (Hybrid Hearing) Halima Adamji Medical & Cit (Exemption), Ahmedabad बनाम/ Education Charitable Trust Vs. Office No. 1, Ground Floor, Halima Apartment, New Rander Road, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaath 6553 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca राज"वक" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Abhishek Gautam, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Shreyansh Anilkumar Shah, Na vs. Arivs.Income Tax Officer, Ward - 5, Navsari

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 727/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.727/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 (Hybrid Hearing) Shreyansh Anilkumar Shah Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, बनाम/ 504, Rushabh Residency, Navsari, Income T Ax Office, Vs. Maneklal Road, Near Charpool, Awabaug, Navsari-396 Telephone Exchange, Navsari- 445 396 445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aiqps 6441 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 22/07/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act’) Dated 26.07.2023 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeal [In Short, The ‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao’) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 27.10.2017. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee For The Appeal Are As Under: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Reopening Assessment U/S.147 By Issuing Notice U/S.148 Of The It Act, 1961. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ao In Making Addition Of Rs.32,53,637/- U/S 68 Of The Act On Account Of Alleged Unexplained Cash Credits.

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 226(3)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Raghav Dangayach, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 4(1) Jpr, Jaipur

15. As a result, the application seeking condonation of delay is hereby dismissed

ITA 993/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Natani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys

Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham, Fagi vs. ITO Exemption Ward - 1, Jaipur

ITA 92/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250

Income for assessment year 2019-20 declaring the total income of Rs. NIL on 31.10.2019, which was processed by the CPC under section 143(1) of the IT Act, 1961. The case was selected through compulsory scrutiny for the reason that registration/approval under various sections of I.T. Act, 1961 have

Maya Rathore, Jaipur vs. Assessing Authority, Jaipur

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

ITA 823/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2023-24
For Appellant: Shri Vikash Rajvanshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 194HSection 250Section 44A

after the due date specified under section 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961. However, the ld. CPC passed Intimation Order under section 143(1) of the IT Act, 1961 on 31.01.2024 in not allowing the benefit of the new tax regime and computing tax as per the old regime

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar vs. Rajendra Kumar Mundra, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 454/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153CSection 250

income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs. 1,37,46,270/- on 28.09.2011. The case was processed under section 143(1) at the returned income of Rs. 1,37,46,270/- under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this case information

Amanta Healthcare Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the order of the Ld

ITA 1088/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 43B

income of Amanta Healthcare Limited vs. Pr. CIT, Ahd-1. Page 2 of 9 Rs.11,66,84,640/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 24.12.2021, wherein certain adjustments were made and the income was computed at Rs.12,66,07,480/-. The case ... assessee submitted that the assessee had filed an appeal against the adjustments made while processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act. He explained that the unpaid VAT of Rs.84,12,642/- and belated payment of employee’s contribution of P.F. Rs.10,65,599/- was already added while

Global University Foundation, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Exemption Ward-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 240/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 240/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Global University Foundation Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad (Exemption) Ward-1 Pan:Aaicg0020F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Suvibha Nolka राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Sankar Pandi, P, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/07/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y.2021-22. 2. There Is A Delay Of 506 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Supported By An Affidavit Of The Director Of The Assessee Foundation. The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Was Not Served With The Impugned Order Dated 14/07/2023 Passed By The Learned Cit (A) & Therefore, Due To The Non-Communication Of The Impugned Order, The Assessee

For Appellant: CA Suvibha NolkaFor Respondent: : Shri Sankar Pandi, P, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 143(1)

ITA No 240 of 2025 Global University Foundation Hyderabad आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX

546 Sulur Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Socirty, Coimbatore vs. Income Tax Officer Non Corp Ward 4(1), Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal and the Stay application of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2159/CHNY/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay546 Sulur Primary Agriculture Co- I.T.O., Operative Credit Society, Vs. Non-Corp Ward 4(1), 61, Town Corporation Street, 67A Race Course Road, Sulur S.O. Rajkamal Tex, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. Coimbatore-641402 (Tamil Nadu) Pan No. Aaaaz 0534 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)

this Tribunal. 5. During the appellate proceedings before us, it was submitted by the ld. AR that it was beyond the scope of Section 143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. It was submitted that power to disallow a claim under Chapter VI-A (including Section 80P) for non- filing ... return within the due date under Section 139(1) of the Act was introduced into Section 143(1)(a) specifically through sub-clause (v) by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. April,1, 2021. Therefore, this provision is not applicable for the assessment year under consideration. Further, it was submitted that

ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Durr India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly-allowed

ITA 1638/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1638/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Acit, Durr India Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle 1 (1), Vs. 471, Prestige Polygon, Chennai. Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. Pan: Aaacd 3568P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Suhrith Parthasarathy, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Suhrith Parthasarathy
Section 115Section 143(1)Section 250Section 40

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज

ACIT, Ncc-2, Madurai vs. Ganesan Anbuselvam, Thiruthangal

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3181/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3181/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग