← 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)

Nomura Research Institute Financial Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. -1(1), Kolkata

ITA 477/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.477/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Nomura Research Institute Financial Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.…..……Appellant 22Nd Floor, Ps Srijan Corporate Park, Tower I, Block-Ep & Gp, Sector-V, Salt Lake, Sech Bhawan, S.O. North 24 Parganas, West Bengal-700091. [Pan: Aadca8967A] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. Jhunjhunwala, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 30, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.01.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Aurangabad [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 15.03.2022 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.15,22,38,899/-. An Intimation Was Received U/S 143(1) Of The Act Dated 27.10.2022 Issued By Cpc, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2021-22. This Order Included Disallowance Of Rs.14,92,802/- To The Income Of The Assessee, Thereby Determining The Total Income At Rs.15,37,31,700/-. The Disallowance Was Made On Account Of Delay In Depositing The Provident Fund (Pf) Contribution, Which Was Considered As A Default.

Section 143(1)Section 250

date. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR opposed the contentions of the ld. AR stating that as per the provisions of section 143(1) of the Act, timely deposit of PF contribution is a statutory requirement and any delay, I.T.A. No.477/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Nomura Research Institute