← 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)

Sbw Udyog Limited, Prayagraj vs. DCIT, Cir-1, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 27/ALLD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh.Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2021-22 Sbw Udyog Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 44, Thornhill Road, Prayagraj Tax, Circle-1, Prayagraj Pan:Aadcs2883B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 .03.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 31.01.2024, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Cpc Bengaluru, Under Section, 143(1) Dated 17.10.2022. Subsequently, The Said Appeal Was Migrated To The Nfac & Later On, The Appeal Proceedings Were Transferred To The Additional / Jcit(A), Aurangabad, Who Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India Has Observed In The Notice Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Reads As Under:- "The Income Tax Department Recognizes & Is Sensitive To The Hardships Being Faced By Taxpayers In Coping With The Challenges Posed By Covid-19 Pandemic." Consequently, Appeal Is Liable To Be Allowed.

For Appellant: Sh. N.C. Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Income Tax Act, 1961 on 31.01.2024, dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the orders of the CPC Bengaluru, under section, 143(1) dated 17.10.2022. Subsequently, the said appeal was migrated to the NFAC and later on, the appeal proceedings were transferred to the Additional / JCIT(A), Aurangabad ... dated 21/12/2022 without any addition, whatsoever hence the addition made for a sum of Rs. 43,04,355/-in the order passed Under Section 143 (1) of the Act is liable to be deleted. 6. Because, the order appealed against is contrary to law, facts and principles of natural justice

Shri Abhishek Lodha, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6056/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Shri. Abhishek Lodha Acit, Central Circle 1(3) C/O. Ketan H. Shah, Advocate, 512, Ayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020. Times Square – 1, Opp. Ram Baug Vs. Bungalow, Thaltej Shilaj Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad, Gujrat – 380059. Pan/Gir No. Aeqpl0917R (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Aman Shah/Shri. Ketan Shah : Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia, (Sr. Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 47, Mumbai (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. In Issuing Notice U/S 148 Dated 05-09-2018 For The Ay 2015-16, It Is Said That, The Whole Proceeding Is Itself Bad In Law & Void & Further, There Is No Such Approval U/S 151 Of The Act & Therefore, The Proceeding Is Bad. 2. In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,63,706/- In Reference To The Commission Income, It Is Said That In View Of The Facts Of The Case, There Is No Evidence Regarding Earning Of Any Commission & Therefore, The Addition Is Required To Be Deleted. Shri. Abhishek Lodha

For Appellant: Shri. Aman Shah/Shri. Ketan Shah
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Five Force Security Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh, Aayakar Bhawan

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 865/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Raj Pal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.865/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Five Force Security Solutions P. Ltd. Acit 2(1) बनाम/ Scf No 20, Top Floor Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Phase 5, Mohali (Punjab)-160055 Chandigarh 160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcf-4798-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Shubham (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 19-06-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 13-11-2022. The Cpc Made Disallowance Of Late Payment Of Pf / Esi Against Which The Assessee Preferred First Appeal. The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 27 Days & Also For Non-Prosecution Of Appeal On The Part Of The Assessee. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Shubham (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJ PAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND

Om Yash Projects Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.40/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2023-24 Om Yash Projects Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Office No. 1113, Aaron Spectra, बनाम/ Ward-3(1)(1), V/S. Rajpath Rangoli Road, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aacco4734C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kaushik Kejriwal & Ms. Kushboo Shah, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Learned Additional / Joint From The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], Dated 26.11.2024, In Connection With The Intimation Under Section 143(1) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2023-24, Issued By The Centralized Processing Center (Cpc), Bangalore, Dated 09.01.2024. Om Yash Projects Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Kaushik Kejriwal & MsFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"], dated 26.11.2024, in connection with the intimation under section 143(1) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2023-24, issued by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC), Bangalore, dated 09.01.2024. Om Yash Projects Ltd. vs. ITO Asst ... claimed TDS credit of Rs. 2,46,82,297/-, reflecting the deduction made by government authorities. The CPC, Bangalore processed the return under section 143(1) and restricted the TDS credit to Rs. 2,26,56,755/-, disallowing Rs. 20,25,542/- by proportionately reducing the TDS claim to match