← 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)

Ranbir Singh, Haryana vs. Ward-2, Ambala, Range Code-65, AO Number-94, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Haryana

In the result, Assessee’s penalty is dismissed

ITA 851/CHANDI/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 851/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Ranbir Singh, Ao, बनाम K203,2Nd Floor, Awho, Ward-2, Vikram Vihar, Sector 27, Ambala. Vs. Panchkula, Haryana-134116 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Avwps0410K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Hemant Jain, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.05.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14-06-2024 Of Ld. Addl /Jcit (Appeals), Mudurai Folder For A.Y. 2021-22. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 43BSection 851

ESIC/EPC. 3. The Learned CIT(A) erred significantly, both factually and legally, in making an adjustment of Rs. 10,03,117/- under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, which exceeds the permissible scope of this provision. Section 143(1) allows for prima facie adjustments based on clear errors ... actual payment dates of employees' contributions towards Provident Fund without recommending any disallowance. The CPC relied on this report to make additions under section 143(1)(a)(iv), which is unjustifiable since the auditor did not indicate any disallowance. Hence, the addition based on this report exceeds the permissible scope

Lions Nab Community Eyecare Centre, Miraj, Sangli vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 257/PUN/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.257/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Lions Nab Community Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore. Eyecare Centre, Plot No.P-39, Midc, Miraj, Sangli- 416410. Pan : Aabfl4373L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is Recalled Matter. Vide Order Dated In M.A. No.151/Pun/2023 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Filed Against The Order Of The Tribunal In Ita No.257/Pun/2022 Dated 06.01.2023 (Appeal Filed By The Assessee) Was Recalled To Adjudicate The Issue De Novo. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Condonation Application Duly

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(i)Section 11(1)(ii)Section 11(2)Section 143(1)

return of income for the period under consideration on 30.09.2011 declaring income of Rs.54,93,373/-. CPC processed the return by intimation under section 143(1) of the IT Act on 27.01.2012 and raised a demand of Rs.18,39,689/-. 5. After considering the reply of the assessee