← 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)

Shilpi Sureshbhai Bapna, Surat vs. ADIT, CPC Bengaluru

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

ITA 1251/SRT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Kishore Gheewala, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80CSection 80T

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax - 4(1), Indore vs. Patel Motors Indore Private Limited, Indore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 628/IND/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Paresh M Joshiआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 628/Ind/2024 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2020-21) बनाम/ Assistant Commissioner Of Patel Motors Indore Income Tax-4(1) Private Limited Vs. Indore 96/97, Maharani Road, Indore, Madhya Pradesh – 452007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp1892R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 37

आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण, इंदौर"यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT

ITO, Jaipur vs. Pooja Agarwal, Jaipur

ITA 84/JPR/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: This Tribunal Revenue As Well As The Assessee-Appellant

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar CIT-DR &
Section 2

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Pooja Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 927/JPR/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: This Tribunal Revenue As Well As The Assessee-Appellant

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar CIT-DR &
Section 2

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Arun Kumar Singh, Kanpur N vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2)(3), Kanpur Nagar

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

ITA 207/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year:2014-15 Arun Kumar Singh V. The Income Tax Officer 127/295, W Block Ward 2(2)(3) Keshav Nagar, Kanpur Kanpur Nagar Tan/Pan:Abhps8877K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 24 04 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 04 2025 O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.01.2025, Passed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A), Mysore For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Retired Government Servant. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 23.07.2014, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.45,32,620/-, Claiming Relief Of Rs.2,95,058/- Under Section 89(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’). The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bangalore Processed The Return Under Section 143(1) Of The Act, Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.45,32,620/-. While Processing The Return Of Income Of The Assessee, The Cpc Denied The Relief

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 89(1)

section 89(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’). The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore processed the return under section 143(1) of the Act, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.45,32,620/-. While processing the return of income of the assessee

Nirmala Trivedi, Kanpur vs. AO Circle-1(1)(1), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 347/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

I.T.A. No.347/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH 'B', LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

Shakuntala Balvantrai Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (Exemp), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 3/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Apr 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 164(1)Section 167BSection 250

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member

Shakuntala Balvantrai Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (Exemp), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as

ITA 2/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Apr 2025AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 164(1)Section 167BSection 250

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC" BENCH Before: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member

Shakuntala Balvantrai Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (Exmp), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 164(1)Section 167BSection 250

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member

Rohitji Chanduji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2) (Previously Ward-3(3)(4)), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 26/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

return of income was filed by the assessee on 11.11.2017 declaring total income of Rs.3,03,880/-. The return was duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued through ITBA

Robossist Technologies, Pune vs. Ward 1, ITO, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 507/PUN/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Apr 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 507/Pun/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Vs Ito Ward-1, Robossist Technologies, D302, 202, Sky Ahmednagar Belvedere, New Airport Road, Pune-411032 Maharashtra Pan-Aapfr6267D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 500Section 50C

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CPC has erred in passing an intimation under section 143 (1) 6/07/2020 / under section 154 dated 27/10/2023 by enhancing the income by Rs. 1,82,09,000/-, by invoking provisions of section ... without appreciating the fact that provision of section 143(1)/154 does not envisage such additions, and therefore entire additions deserves to be deleted. 3. Without prejudice to the above ground and on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessing Officer erred in making

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Cirlce 3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 154/HYD/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 149/HYD/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 148/HYD/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 147/HYD/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘ ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रवीश

Tara Maa Gold, Birbhum vs. DCIT-3, Suri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2631/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Debayan Patra, FCAFor Respondent: Sm. Ruchika Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

disallowed by the Assessing Officer, CPC while computing the total income under the 2 Tara Maa Gold, AY: 2020-21 provisions of section 143(1) of the Act. He urged before the Bench to reverse the action of the Ld. CIT(A). 4. In reply, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently

West Bengal Power Development Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. Dy. CIT, CPC, Bangaluru

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

ITA 2348/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

West Bengal Power Development Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangaluru

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

ITA 2347/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Asok Sparks, Virudhunagar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Virudhunagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 93/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 93/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Asok Sparks, The Acit, 468, Pks Arumugandar Road, Circle 1, Vs. Sivakasi, Virudhunagar. Virudhunagar – 626 189. [Pan: Aaufa-8489-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र

M/S. Ankur Grand Owners Association, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-10(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 480/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:480/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 57Section 70(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र