← 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)

Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Meerut vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Meerut

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1084/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrapaschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Vs. The Dy. C.I.T C/O Adv Vinod Kumar Goel Circle – 2 200, Western Kutchery Road Meerut Meerut.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monica Singh, CIT- DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 4Section 40Section 43B

assessee company has filed its return showing loss of Rs. 21,69,02,82,395/- on 30.09.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the income tax act, 1961. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Income

Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni, Margao vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 50/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavankumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 050/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni A-3/A-4, C.D. Neighbourhood, Swami Chinmayanand Marg, Gogoi, Salcete, Margao, Goa Pan : Dkzpk5732F . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Director Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 19/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; Assessee’S Captioned Appeal Impugns Din & Order 1072026383(1) Dt. 09/01/2025 Passed By Addl//Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-2, Jaipur [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Intimation Dt. 26/11/2021 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Asstt. Direction Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVANKUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G

Dicul Am Private Limited, Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward 2(31), Nagpur

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

ITA 43/NAG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Loya, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No. 43/NAG/2025 (Assessment

D S Trading, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1885/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271A

assessee filed the return of income on 15.02.2022 declaring a business loss of Rs. 1,77,96,363/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). During FY 2020-21, the assessee had entered into an international transaction of purchase

The ACIT, Central Circle-1, Vadodara vs. M/S. S.S. Infra, Vadodara

In the result, for the detailed reasons recorded above while adjudicating each of the grounds, all the grounds raised by the Revenue in these appeals for the assessment years 2015–16 to 2018–19 sta...

ITA 158/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarit(Ss)A No.78, 79 & 80/Ahd/2021 Asstt.Year : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-16 & Asstt.Year 2018-19 Dcit, Cent.Cir.1 M/S.S.S. Infra Vadodara. Vs. Survey No.579 Shree Hari Duplex, Mouje Bil Vadodaa 391 410. Pan : Acnfs 6514 Q (Applicant) (Responent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

firm, engaged in the business of real estate development, filed its return of income for respective assessment years. All returns were processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was conducted on 31.01.2018 in the case of "Haathee & Ananta

Kothari Feeds LLP, Pune vs. C 1 Range 56 Circle 5, Pune

ITA 326/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.326/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Kothari Feeds Llp, Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru. Summet Plaza, E-30/31, Gultekdi, Market Yard, Pune- 411037. Pan : Aatfk1257C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri S. Sadananda Singh Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manish Borad, Am: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Udaipur [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 11.12.2024 Which Is Arising Out Of The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2020-21 Framed On 25.11.2021 By The Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh
Section 10Section 143(1)

Tribunal. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee raised two folds arguments firstly, the adjustments made by the CPC is not in accordance with section 143(1) of the Act and secondly, the assessee LLP is eligible for exemption u/s 10(2A) of the Act being partner in another partnership firm

Navalai Gramin Bigarsheti Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd, Satara vs. ITO Ward 4, Satara

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

ITA 1085/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1085/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 144Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1085/PUN/2025

Ashok Patni Family Trust, Pune vs. The Asst./Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2781/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2781/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Ashok Patni Family Trust, Vs. A/Dcit, Circle-7, Pune. S.No.1A, F-1, Irani Market Compound, Yerwada, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aagta3844A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri C.H. Naniwadekar Revenue By : Shri S. Sadananda Singh Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manish Borad, Am: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Faridabad [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 25.11.2024 Which Is Arising Out Of The Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2022-23 Framed On 16.03.2023 By The Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. 2. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Is That Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Cpc Levying Surcharge Of 37% As Against The Applicable Rate Of 10% Based Upon The Income Of The Assessee. 3. At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Stated That The Issue Stands Squarely Covered By The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Special

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh
Section 111ASection 112Section 112ASection 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA

Nrb Bearings Limited, Mumbai vs. Joint Comissioner of Income Tax (OSD) - Circle 2(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3019/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Makadia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA

Nrb Bearings Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3018/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Makadia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA

Ultima Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(3) (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2628/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 246ASection 250

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ायपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE

Aon Consulting Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissoner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 4415/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 154Section 253

there were no borrowed funds/outstanding loans during the captioned assessment year. Addition on account of income considered as per intimation order issued under section 143(1) of the Act. 5 That the facts and circumstances of case and in law, the Ld. AO/CPC erred in considering income as determined ... intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act of Rs 1,238,603,590 vis-a-vis returned income of Rs 1,076,114,310. 6 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO/CPC has failed to appreciate that the additions/ disallowances

International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage Employees Provident Fund (Icid Pf Trust), New Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 4204/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10Section 10(21)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

Column 12 of part B of TI (Total Income)]. These ITRs were processed under section 143(1) of the Act wherein the AO (CPC) disallowed the claim of exemption under section 10 of the Act on the reasoning that the assessee was not eligible for said exemption under specified ... duly mentioned in ITRs. Later, the assessee filed applications under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the processing under section 143(1) of the Act for allowing exemption under section 10(25)(ii) of the Act. The said rectification applications were rejected on the reasoning that there

International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage Employees Provident Fund (Icid Pf Trust), New Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 4203/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10Section 10(21)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

Column 12 of part B of TI (Total Income)]. These ITRs were processed under section 143(1) of the Act wherein the AO (CPC) disallowed the claim of exemption under section 10 of the Act on the reasoning that the assessee was not eligible for said exemption under specified ... duly mentioned in ITRs. Later, the assessee filed applications under section 154 of the Act for rectification of the processing under section 143(1) of the Act for allowing exemption under section 10(25)(ii) of the Act. The said rectification applications were rejected on the reasoning that there

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad vs. Anup Jain, Ghaziabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 377/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

1 A.Y. 2017-18 Anup Jain IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F ”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. ANNAPURNA

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut vs. Prem Sapra, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 143(3)Section 54

1 ACIT v. Prem Sapra A.Y. 2021-22 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE

DCIT Circle-52(1), Income Tax vs. Pranav Gupta, Legal Heir of Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 2192/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Roydcit, Cir-52(1) Vs. Sh. Pranav Gupta, 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2, Legal Heir Of Late Sh. Vijay Block, Civic Centre, Kumar Gupta, 11, Darya Delhi- 110002 Ganj, New Delhi- 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaipg0797N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv. &For Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

this that the appellant filed original return of income on 22.07.2009 declaring total income of Rs.209,13,750/- which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act accepting the return filed by the assessee. In the said return of income the long term capital gain out of the sale

ITO(Exemption), Indore vs. Arogya Seva Mandal, Burhanpur Madhya Pradesh

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 750/IND/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M.Joshi

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

Audit Report dated 19/10/2018 in the prescribed Form 10B at page 15 of the Paper Book. The_assessee_after_receiving the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act uploaded the Audit Report on 18/04/2020 in First Appellate proceedings. 5. In my considered view non-filing of Audit Report

Shri Barwala Panjrapole, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Exemp., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 88/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12A(1)(B)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee/applicant trust filed return of income on 14.10.2022. Thereafter, notice under Section 143(1)(a) dated 14.02.2023 was issued by CPC, wherein certain adjustments were proposed. The assessee/applicant trust could not file response to the said Shri Barwala Panjrapole ... Asst. Year –2022-23 - 2– notice and on 04.04.2023 an intimation order under Section 143(1) of the Act was passed, wherein exemption under Section 11 of the Act, claimed by the assessee was withdrawn and income amounting to Rs. 2,34,78,541/- was treated as income

Nanda Kumar Parthasarathy, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1085/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1085/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Nana Kumar Parthasarathy, Income Tax Officer, No.315, Ramaniyam Katima, Non-Corp Ward-15(1), No.148, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Chennai. Thuraipakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Cdjpp3991B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Y.Sridhar,F.C.A, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Y.Sridhar,F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार धिरर