← 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)

Wika Instruments India Private Limited, Pune vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-12, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2767/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2767/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Wika Instruments India V The Dcit, Private Limited, S. Circle-12, Pune. Hi-Cliff Industrial Estate, Kesnand, Pune – 412207. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaacw2665A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Mutha – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Act, Dated 25.10.2024 To Give Effect To The Order Of The Dispute Resolution Panel(Drp) Passed U/S.144C(5) Of The Act, Dated 26.09.2024 Emanating From Draft Assessment Order Under Section 144C(1) Of

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(11)Section 144C(5)

dated 26.12.2023. The Assessee has filed Revised Grounds of appeal as under : “Revised Grounds of appeal : 1. Ground 1: Erroneous adjustment under section 143(1) ought to have been addressed in the regular assessment proceedings. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... learned Dispute Resolution Panel(“Ld. DRP”) erred in holding that the adjustments made under section 143(1) by the Assessing Officer, Centralized Processing Centre (“Assessing Officer (CPC”) cannot be addressed during the course of assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income

Intelligent Communication System India Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Delhi

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

ITA 5532/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarintelligent Communication System India Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 12 (1), First Floor, Administrative Building, Delhi. Okhla Industrial Estate, Delhi – 110 020. (Pan : Aaaci0691N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Farhat Miyan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date Of Order : 03.06.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 30.09.2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “On The Fact & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of The Rs.1,38,75,883/- Under Section 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act. The Action Of The Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) & Ld. Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Is Wrong, Misconceived & Unjustified Therefore It Should Be Quashed.”

For Appellant: Shri Farhat Miyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Tribunal in Cemetile Industries vs. ITO (supra) had expressed a view that such adjustment/disallowance is also permissible in the proceedings carried out under Section 143(1) of the Act. Very recently, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Savleen Kaur & Others vs. ITO in ITA Nos. 2249/Del/2022 & Others

Shri Dhoraji Nagrik Sharafi and Grahak Sahkari Mandali Limited, Dhoraji vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 478/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.478/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shri Dhoraji Nagrik Sharafi & Vs. Income Tax Officer Grahak Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Ward – 1(2)(1), C/O. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1St Rajkot. Floor, Dr. Radha – Krishnan Road, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot- 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaad7775Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), which in turn arises out of an order passed by Assessing Officer, under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (herein after referred to as “the Act”), dated 25.06.2019. 2 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee ... return was filed beyond the time prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act, the said adjustment does not fall in the scope of Section 143(1) of the Act, as there is neither an arithmetical error nor an incorrect claim apparent from the records. The ld Counsel also submitted that