← 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)

The Pakhowal M.P.C.S.Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jagraon, Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 915/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.915/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Pakhowal M.P.C.S.Ltd. Ito Village Pakhowal Tehsil Raikot बनाम/ Vs. Ward-1 District Ludhiana.141108 Jagraon. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaat-4714-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Manpreet Singh Kanda (Advocate )–Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 07-08-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 12-07-2019 Denying Deduction Claimed By The Assessee U/S 80P(2)(B)(I) For Rs.6.10 Lacs. The Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Admit The Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 1571 Days Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Manpreet Singh Kanda (Advocate )–Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 80P(2)(b)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), Delhi vs. Presude Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 3421/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2022-23 Dcit, Cir.19(1) Vs. Presude Lifesciences P. Ltd. Delhi. Plot No.Rz-6 (B-6) Upper Ground Floor Om Vihar, Uttam Nagar West Delhi Delhi 110 059. Pan : Aajcp 7759 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/(Respondent) थ" Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Ca Assesseeby : Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/04/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, CA
Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 80Section 80I

appeal relates to the claim of deduction of profits under section 80-IAC, which was denied to the assessee in theintimation made under section 143(1) of the Act for the reason that the report required to be furnished by the assessee in form 10CCB was delayed. 4. The assessee ... this reason the assessee’s claim of deduction of Rs.6.52 crores was disallowed, and added to its income in the intimation made under section 143(1) of the Act. 5. The assessee carried the matter in appeal, who deleted the disallowance noting that – i) the delay in filing Form No.10CCB