← 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)

Huhtamaki India Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 6, Mumbai

ITA 2668/MUM/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024

Bench: Shriamarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeι.Τ.Α No.2668/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Huhtamaki India Limited A-802, Cresenzo, C-38/39 G Block, Brandra Kurla Complex Bandra (East), Mumbai Pan: Aaact0086E Appellant Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income- Tax-6, Mumbai 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mahrishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Tiwari Respondent By : Shrisolgy Jose T. Kottaram(Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/07/2024 Order Per Anikesh Banerjee, J.M: Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Is Preferred Against The Order Of Thelearned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Mumbai-6 (For Brevity, ‘Ld.Pcit') Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, ‘The Act'), For Assessment Year 2018-19, Date Of Order21.03.2024.The Impugned Order Was Emanated From The Order Of The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, (In Short, ‘The A.O.') Passed Under Section 143(3)Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Date Of Order19/04/2021. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: ShriSolgy Jose T. Kottaram(CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 263

levying interest under section 234D amounting to Rs. 1,56,035 on refund granted to the Assessee vide the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act. The above grounds of objections are distinct and separate and without prejudice to each other. The appellant craves leave to add, alter

Gowrin Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ITO Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1368/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.1367 & 1368/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020) M/S. Gowrin Charitable Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.36/40, Lazarus Church Road, (Exemption) Mandavelipakkam, Ward 1, Rajaannamalaipuram, Chennai. Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabtg 1312N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K.R. Sudersan, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri V.Justin, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sudersan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri V.Justin, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(3)

above said both the return of income were processed under section 143(1) wherein CPC issued a communications proposing to make adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act in both AYs. 4. Further, the appellant filed the appeals before the ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 36 months against ... intimation orders passed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru under section 143(1) of the Act dated 18.03.2020 for AY 2018-19 and 04.06.2020 for AY 2019-20. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed both the appeals on account of delay in filing the appeals as per section

Gowrin Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ITO Exemptions Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1367/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.1367 & 1368/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020) M/S. Gowrin Charitable Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.36/40, Lazarus Church Road, (Exemption) Mandavelipakkam, Ward 1, Rajaannamalaipuram, Chennai. Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabtg 1312N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K.R. Sudersan, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri V.Justin, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Sudersan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri V.Justin, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(3)

above said both the return of income were processed under section 143(1) wherein CPC issued a communications proposing to make adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act in both AYs. 4. Further, the appellant filed the appeals before the ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 36 months against ... intimation orders passed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru under section 143(1) of the Act dated 18.03.2020 for AY 2018-19 and 04.06.2020 for AY 2019-20. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed both the appeals on account of delay in filing the appeals as per section