“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)

Cooperative Cane Deve. Union, Ltd., Haridwar vs. ITO, W- 1(3)(1), Haridwar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 158/DDN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year: 2019-20] Co-Operative Cane Development Vs Ito Union Limited, Jawalapur, Ward-1(3)(1) Vill. & P.O. Jawalapur, Distt.- Haridwar Haridwar, Uttarakhand-249407 Uttarakhand Pan-Aaaic0152B Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2018-19/10076885 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Intimation Order Dated 02.12.2020 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Assessee Filed The Letter & Stated That The Written Submission Made Be Considered. Therefore, Ld. Sr. Dr Was Heard & Proceeded To Decide The Appeal Filed By The Assessee On The Basis Of Material Available On Record. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Co-Operative Society Constituted By The State Government, Engaged In The Business Of Providing Credit Facilities To Its Members Who Are Agriculturists & Cane Growers Also, Marketing Of Agricultural Products & Purchase Of Agricultural Implements & Other Products Like Fertilizers, Insecticides Etc. Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.08.2019, Declaring Total Income At Nil & Claimed Deduction U/S 80P Of Inr 1,04,54,668/-. Thereafter, The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S 143(1), Assessed Total Income At Inr 1,04,54,668/- Where Deduction U/S 80P Was Not Provided To The Assessee Society.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P

ITA No.158/DDN/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI

Krunal Rajendra Kanakhara, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward - 2(6), Jamnagar

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

ITA 812/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.812/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) Krunal Rajendra Kanakhara, Income Tax Officer, 401, Giriraj Apartment, 29/30 Digvijay Ward-2(6), Jamnagar, Aaykar बनाम Plot, Seth Bhagwandas Road, Jamnagar- Bhawan, Jamnagar-Rajkot /Vs. 361 005 Highway, Jamnagar-361 007 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ammpk 5188 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ravindra Manek, Ar Respondent By : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Manek, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 250

issue afresh on merits. The assessee is also directed to file the relevant documents and evidences pertaining to error in the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Kanhaiya Lal Panchal, Ratlam vs. Bpl-W-(91)(95), Ratlam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/IND/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2024-25 Kanhaiya Lal Panchal, Bpl-W-(91)(95) 1, Jadwasa Kala, बनाम/ Ratlam Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aqrpp0055D Assessee By Shri Kaide Kangsawala, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026

Section 111ASection 112Section 112ASection 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 3(6)Section 81Section 87A

assessee's claim under section 87A on technical grounds without affording a prior opportunity is also violative of the proviso to section 143(1), which mandates the issue of an intimation or notice prior to making such adjustments. 4.6 In support of the assessee’s contention, the AR placed reliance ... under section 111A, and opted for taxation under the new regime under section 115BAC(1A). The CPC, Bengaluru, processed the return under section 143(1) and denied rebate under section 87A of Rs. 13,320/-, resulting in a demand of Rs.1 5,820/-. The CIT(A) upheld the denial, primarily

Annie Hemendrakumar Khatri, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2315/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T. R. Senthil

Shamalbhai Lallubhai Prajapati, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar

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

ITA 2031/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms. Suchitra Kambleshamalbhai Lallubhai Prajapati The Income Tax Vs. 22, Vidhyanagar Society Officer, Pethapur, S.O. Pethapur Ward-1, Gandhinagar – 382 610 Gandhinagar – 382 011

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: -None-

Section 143(1)Section 89Section 89A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Rajat Rajendraprasad Rastogi, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2 (Intl. Taxn.), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1783/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Dharmaveer Sambhaji Nagari Sahakari Pat Maryadit, Pune vs. PCIT, Pune

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

ITA 1217/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Dharmaveer Sambhaji Nagari Pcit-3, Pune Sahakari Pat Maryadit Vs. A/P Manchar, Tal-Ambegaon, Dist. Pune – 410503 Pan: Aaaad5228N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandip Argade Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 13-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-01-2026

For Appellant: Shri Sandip ArgadeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Sudheer Chirania, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 23(3)(7), Mumbai

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

ITA 5263/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan & Mr. RaviFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

income of ₹6,09,380/- after claiming exemption under section 10(38) on long-term capital gains (LTCG). The return was processed under section 143(1). 3. Subsequently, the AO reopened the assessment based on information received from the Investigation Wing alleging that the assessee was a beneficiary of accommodation

Anil Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-26, Jhandewalan, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 475/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

without alleging any failure on the part of Appellant in disclosing full and truly all primary relevant facts during the original assessment under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO erred in initiating reassessment on the basis

DCIT, Central Circle 28, New Delhi vs. Abhi Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2886/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Varun Garg, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153C

Return of income for the A.Y 2011-12 on 31.03.2012 declaring total income of Rs 62,750/- and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short]. The case of the assessee was selected for assessment proceedings u/s 153C

DCIT, Central Circle 28, New Delhi vs. Abhi Capital Services Limited, Delhi

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2885/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Varun Garg, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153C

Horizon Hge Electronic Equipment India Pvt Ltd, Gautam Buddha Nagar vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2695/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2020-21] Horizon Hge Electronicequipment Vs Dcit India Pvt.Ltd., 1St Floor, Awho, Circle-10(1) Sector-29, Noida Sector-37, S.O- New Delhi Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201303. Pan-Aacch0704R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Satyen Sethi, Adv. & Shri A.T.Panda, Adv. Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 19.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.03.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-5, Kolkata [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Addl/Jcit(A)-5 Kolkata/10001/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Intimation Order Dated 18.12.2021 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company, Derived Income From Business & Filed Its Return Of Income On 14.10.2020, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 2,42,00,780/- & Paid Taxes In Terms Of The Concessional Rate Of Tax Provide U/S 115Baa Which Was Denied By Cpc In The Intimation Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act For The Reason That Form 10-Ic Was Filed Delayed.

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

ITA No.2695/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Outsourcepartners International Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle- 19(1), Delhi

ITA 5975/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Vs. Outsourcepartners Circle-19(1), International Pvt. Ltd., Delhi 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2018-19 Outsourcepartners Vs. The Assessment Unit, International Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Department 414, 4Th Foor, Dlf Jasola [Jao-Dcit, Circle-19(1), Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Delhi] Dda District Centre Jasola, New Delhi Pan: Aaaco5734C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

facts in not even adjudicating its corresponding substantive ground no. 3 to 5 seeking to reverse the CPC’s section 143(1) processing disallowing/adding the corresponding expenditure claims. We note in this factual backdrop that the learned CIT(A)’s detailed discussion in para 8 makes it clear that ... assessee’s separate appeal preferred against the CPC’s section 143(1) processing is already pending before the first appellate authority. We are accordingly of the view that given the fact that section 246A(1)(a) prescribes a separate remedy of the appeal to be filed against section 143(1

DCIT, Circle- 19(1), Delhi vs. Outsourcepartners International Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 5808/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Renew Surya Vihaan Private Ltd, Delhi vs. CIT, NFAC, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5360/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that rejection of grant of TDS credit by CPC vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Act is bad in law and contrary to the provisions of law. 4. That on facts and circumstances of the case

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Jalco Financial Services Private Limited, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4209/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveenc Chandraacit, Vs. Jalco Financial Services Room No. 316A, C.R. Private Limited Building, I.P. Estate, K-7B, Ground Floor, New Delhi – 110002 Kalkaji, New Delhi – 110019 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacj2791E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. MayankPatawari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 15HSection 37Section 37(1)Section 68

trading shares, stocks, securities and other instruments. Return was filed at a total loss of Rs.30,20,889/- which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act by CPC and later on case was selected for complete scrutiny and to verify expenses debited to profit and loss account

Noida Towers Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-16(1), Delhi

ITA 4199/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Hero Fincorp Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 11(1), Delhi, C.R. Building

ITA 2542/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdient (), Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2542/Del/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Year:2017-18 Hero Fincop Ltd., 34 Community Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1) C. R. Building, New Delhi-110002 अपीलार्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Pan:Aaach0157J Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Shri Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Shri Himanshu Aggarwal Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit(Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.01.2026 उद्घोषणाकीतारीख/Pronouncement On 16.01.2026 आदेश /Order Per Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am, The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of ‘Hire Purchase Leasing & Finance'. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac)/(First Appellate Authority Hereinafter Referred As “Faa”), Delhi Dated 27.03.2024 Arising Out Of Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Act Dated 29.12.2019For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Disallowance Of Provision For Collection Charges -Rs. 9,75,00,000/-

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESDIENT (THIRD MEMBER), SHRI SATBEER

Prem Lata Verma, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1)(1), Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 441/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 10(1)Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Clause (b) of Section 158 BC by referring to Section 143(2) and (3) would appear to imply that the provisions of Section 143(1) are excluded. But Section 143(2) itself becomes necessary only where it becomes necessary to check the return, so that where block return conforms

ITO, Aligarh vs. Rashid Laloo, Aligarh

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 129/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR