← 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)

Pinnac Parijaat Co.Op. Hsg. Society Ltd, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 531/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.531/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Pinnac Parijaat Co. Op. V The Income Tax Officer, Housing Society Limited, S Ward-2(2), Pune. S.No.35, Hissa No.1,3,4,5,11,12, Karve Nagar, Pune – 411052. Pan: Aadap9430D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)/[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, On 24.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Total Income Of The Appellant At Rs. 3,13,990/-Instead Of 1,01,830/-

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Income for A.Y.2020-21 on 09.02.2021 claiming deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs.2,12,161/-. The order under section 143(1) was passed by CPC, Bangalore disallowing assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80P(2)(d) of the Act. Assessee claimed that since no specific ... reason was mentioned in the order under section 143(1) for ITA No.531/PUN/2025 [A] denying the claim of Assessee for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act, assessee filed a rectification application under section 154 of the Act. The CPC Bangalore passed an order under section

Aon Consulting Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 739/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआअसं.739/िद"ी/2022(िन.व. 2017-18) M/S Aon Consulting P. Ltd., Aon Centre, 9Th To 11Th, Building No.2, Unitech Realty Projects Ltd., (Sez), Village Tikri, Sector 48, Gurgaon, Haryana 122001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aahca-0739-J बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 1(1), Delhi Assessee By : Shri Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate Department By : S/Shri Rajesh Kumar & Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 09/04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed The Assessment Order Dated 22.02.2022 Passed U/S. 143 R.W.S. 144C(13) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). 2. The Assessee In Appeal Has Assailed Transfer Pricing Adjustment Made In Respect Of Software Development Services Segment. The Assessee Has Also Assailed Some Additions On Corporate Issue, Viz. Disallowance Made U/S. 14A R.W.S. 8D & Additions Based On Intimation U/S. 143(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajesh Kumar & Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 14A

deducted was not granted in full. The contention of the assessee is that the adjustments made by CPC were beyond the scope of section 143(1) of the Act. 18. Per contra, the ld. DR placing reliance on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Microsoft India

Janaki Thangam Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-3, Chennai

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.430/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & S.A. No. 36/Chny/2025 [In I.T.A. No. 430/Chny/2025] Janaki Thangam Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 9, Santhanasrinivasa Perumal Exemptions Ward (3), Koil Street, Tnhb Special Scheme, Chennai. Mogappair West, Chennai 600 037. [Pan: Aaatj5734C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Raman, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-7, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Ld. Ar Shri S. Sundar Raman, Ca Prayed To Take-Up Appeal For Hearing & Adjudication First & With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Hear The Appeal First.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Raman, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

assessee claimed exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The CPC, Bengaluru, vide intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act dated 30.11.2021, denied the said claim for not filing return of income within due date under section 139(1 ... assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the intimation order dated 3 I.T.A. No. 430/Chny/25 & S.A. No.36/Chny/25 30.11.2021 passed under section 143(1) of the Act with a delay of 754 days. The ld. AR drew our attention to para 6 of the impugned order and submits