← 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)

Trans Union Llc, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1441/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri NikhilFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

India in accordance with section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. The assessee's return for the year under consideration was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. (supra) has decided ... that time had voluntarily offered the receipts from the software licenses to tax. The return was processed by the CPC and intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued. 6.2 The Appellant applied for online rectification of the 143(1) intimation and orders under section 154 r.w.s. 143

Trans Union Llc, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1405/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri NikhilFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

India in accordance with section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. The assessee's return for the year under consideration was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. (supra) has decided ... that time had voluntarily offered the receipts from the software licenses to tax. The return was processed by the CPC and intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued. 6.2 The Appellant applied for online rectification of the 143(1) intimation and orders under section 154 r.w.s. 143

Trans Union Llc, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1404/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri NikhilFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

India in accordance with section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. The assessee's return for the year under consideration was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. (supra) has decided ... that time had voluntarily offered the receipts from the software licenses to tax. The return was processed by the CPC and intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued. 6.2 The Appellant applied for online rectification of the 143(1) intimation and orders under section 154 r.w.s.143(1

Trans Union Llc, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1403/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri NikhilFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 9(1)(vi)

India in accordance with section 9(1)(vi) of the Act. The assessee's return for the year under consideration was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. (supra) has decided ... that time had voluntarily offered the receipts from the software licenses to tax. The return was processed by the CPC and intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued. 6.2 The Appellant applied for online rectification of the 143(1) intimation and orders under section 154 r.w.s.143(1

Oorissa Evangelist Trust Association, Cuttack vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Cuttack

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Orissa Evangelistic Trust Ito, Exemption Ward, Cuttack Association, Aaykar Bhavan, Shelter Chhak At-Kesharpur, Buxi Bazar, Tulsipur, Cuttack, Vs. Cuttack-753001 Odisha-753008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaato0708P Assessee By : Shri Sk Sarangi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao B, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri SK Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nishanth Rao B, DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

along with the return of income. It is also an admitted fact that at the time of processing the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the audit report by way of Form 10 was very much available before the CPC/AO. The Id. Counsel for the assessee

Nesco Employees Gratuity Fund Trust, Balasore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Balasore

ITA 159/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Nihar Ranjan Biswal, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(24)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250

cause notice nor any communication has been issued to the assessee before proposing the adjustment which is in violation of the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Act. Thus, the Id. AR submitted that order passed by both the authorities below deserve to be set aside and the assessee

Indira Gandhi Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Exemption Indira Gandhi Institute Of Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pharmaceutical Sciences Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Third N-4/208 Nayapalli, Irc Village, Floor, Regional Telecom Trg Vs. Khorda, Odisha-751015 Centre, Vss Nagar Road, Bhubaneswar-751007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati7724B Assessee By : Shri Kc Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri KC Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

along with the return of income. It is also an admitted fact that at the time of processing the return of income under section 143(1) of the Act, the audit report by way of Form 10 was very much available before the CPC/AO. The Id. Counsel for the assessee

Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi, Pune vs. DCIT Circle - 12, Pune

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

ITA 956/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 6Section 90

return of income (ROI), I had claimed TDS credit of Rs. 3,26,380/- as reflected in Form 26AS. In the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, the Ld. CPC accepted the Returned Income However, the Ld. CPC 3 Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi allowed credit ... less Rs. 1,17,264) in the Intimation is not even a permissible adjustment under section 143(1) of the Act as TDS of Rs. 3,23,380 claimed in the ROI was also reflected in Form 26AS. In view of the above submission, I request your Honour to direct

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 548/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 547/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 546/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 545/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Wirtgen India Private Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 560/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Wirtgen India Private Limited Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru Gate No.301, 302, Bhandagaon Khor Vs. Road, Taluka Daund, Dist. Pune – 412214 Pan: Aaacw2816R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Prakash L Pathade, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 08-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Prakash L Pathade, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Creamline Dairy Products Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1183/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, K C Devdas And CA C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Sri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Creamline Dairy Products Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1157/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, K C Devdas And CA C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Sri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Creamline Dairy Products Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1156/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, K C Devdas And CA C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Sri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Shree Shree Ramkrishna Samity, Siliguri vs. Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.527/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2023-2024) Shree Shree Ramkrishna Samity Vs Cpc, It Department, Bengaluru Kiran Chandra Building, Sevoke Rd Siliguri H.O., Siliguri, Darjiling Pan No. : Aacas 9103 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Sabya Sachi Mandal, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Jcit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Gurugram, Dated 27.01.2025 For The Assessment Year 2023-2024. 2. Shri Sabya Sachi Mandal, Ld.Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Smt. Sima Das Biswas, Ld. Sr.Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Submitted An Adjournment Application Physically Which Has Not Been Signed. The Said Adjournment Application Has Not Been Sent Through Email Also. Therefore, The Adjournment Application Is Rejected & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Disposed Off. 4. The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income On 14.11.2023. The Form 10B Has Been Filed Along With Return On 14.11.2023. The Due Date For Return Is 13.11.2023. The Intimation U/S.143(1) Of The Act Has Been Issued On 18.11.2024. The Cpc Has Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Exemption

For Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, JCIT-Sr.DR
Section 11Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन

Sri Adwaitya Achrya Trust, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T./I.T.O., Ward - 1(3), Exemption, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2552/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Parakh, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sima Das Biswas, JCIT-Sr.DR
Section 11Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन

Tharmaraj Gopi, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(2), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 682/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.682/Chny/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tharmaraj Gopi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Plot No.1, Bharathidasan 1St Street, Non-Corp Ward-8(2), Kandasamy Nagar, Chennai. Poonamallee, Chennai-600 056. [Pan: Akqpg3889D]

For Appellant: Mr. Y.Sridhar, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि