“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)

Kisanmitra Warehousing Private Limited, Latur vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 359/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.358 & 359/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2020-21 & 2021-22 Kisanmitra Warehousing Private Limited, Vs. Adit, Cpc, Plot No.B-113, 114, 115, 117, Bengaluru Additional Midc, Latur, Maharashtra 413 531 Pan : Aaeck0739A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80I

apparent from any information in the return of income can be made. Explanation appended to sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) to section 143(1) explains the meaning of ‘incorrect claim’ apparent from any information in the return of income to mean that information which is required to be furnished ... Commissioner of Income Tax 373 ITR 661, the intimation u/s.143(1) is not to be considered as an assessment. The provisions of section 143(1) have to be considered on stand-alone basis. Therefore, in terms of sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of Explanation appended to section 143(1

Kisanmitra Warehousing Private Limited, Latur vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 358/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Subham RathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 44ASection 80I

Matrix Security and Surveillance Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle 5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the A

ITA 206/HYD/2024[2022-2023]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad12 Jul 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.205 & 206/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2021-22 & 2022-23) Matrix Security & Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Surveillance (P) Limited Circle 5(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aadcm3902F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A. E.V. Sri Krishna राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: C.A. E.V. Sri KrishnaFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 143(1)

ITA Nos 205 and 206 of 2024 Matrix Security and Surveillance P Ltd आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE

Matrix Security and Survelliance Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the A

ITA 205/HYD/2024[2021-2022]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad12 Jul 2024AY 2021-2022

For Appellant: C.A. E.V. Sri KrishnaFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 143(1)

ITA Nos 205 and 206 of 2024 Matrix Security and Surveillance P Ltd आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE

Mohammed Quadri Ahmed, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 550/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 550/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mohd.Quadri Ahmed, Asst. Commissioner Hyderabad Vs. Of Income Tax, [Pan : Abfph7467L] Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad अपीलाथ" / Appellant "" यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri CH Rajeswara Reddy, DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 69A

income for the assessment year 2019- 20 on 29/6/2020 admitting an income of Rs. 92,85,980/- and it was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) by intimation dated 9/7/2020. There was search and seizure operation under section

Shankar Sewani, New Market vs. Assessing Officer, Aaykar Bhawan

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 25/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Shankar Sewani, Dcit-1(1), 10 Kala Niketan, Bhopal New Market, Vs. T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adkps6959H Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 3

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

Termoplast Pollypacks Italy India Pvt. Ltd., Tiruvallur vs. The DCIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assesse is dismissed

ITA 1104/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1104/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri M.Karunakaran, Advocate

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 246Section 246(1)(a)Section 250

that an assesse aggrieved by orders passed by Income Tax Authorities under various sections are entitled to file appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Section 143(1) is one such section included in section 246(1)(a) and reads as under:.. 246. Appealable orders.—(1) Subject to the provisions

Sonny Fireworks Pvt. Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, CC-2, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1081/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1081/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Sonny Fireworks Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, 12A/1C, West Street, Corporate Circle-2, Thiruthangal-626 123. Madurai. [Pan: Aadcs 3010 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwaran, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh-

Section 143(1)Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Om Prakash Thakur, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaom Prakash Thakur, Vs. Ito, Ward 29 (3), 118/01, Govind Puri, Galli No.2, New Delhi. Opp. To Kalkaji Bust Depot, New Delhi – 110 019. (Pan : Abgpt9067R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tajender Khanna, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Order : 12.07.2024 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 17.01.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. The Assessing Officer Has Erred In & (Nfac) Has Compounded The Error By Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer Limiting The Value Of The Deduction To Rs. 65.45 Lakh Only I.E. By Not Allowing Rs. 23.50 Lakh Which Was Paid By Assessee For Putting The House In Habitable Condition Under Section 54 Of The Income Tax Act. 2. The Assessing Officer Has Erred In & (Nf Ac) Has Compounded The Error By Not Recognizing The Fact That The Assessee Had Entered Into Two Separate Contracts With The Same Builder One For The Purchase Of Raw House Property & Second

For Appellant: Shri Tajender Khanna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 54

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Om Prakash Thakur

Tukaram Mahadev Suryavanshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Ward 4(5), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 785/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.785/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Tukaram Mahadev Vs. Ito, Ward-4(5), Pune. Suryavanshi, 210 Ruby Industrial Premises Soc. Ltd., Chincholi Bandar, Mindspace, Malad West, Mumbai- 400064. Pan : Afops1105F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Anil Topiwala Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastava Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.07.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2024 Passed By Ld Addl./Jacit(A), Kanpur For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Addl/Jcit(A) Kanpur-Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Learned Assistant Director Of Income-Tax Cpc- Bangalore Order Disallowing The Sum Of Rs. 55,10,270/- U/S 36 (1)(Va) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Being Employees Contribution To Provident Fund & Esic As Per Tax Audit Report Deposited

For Appellant: Shri Anil TopiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava

Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

which is deposited beyond the due date specified under PF & ESIC Laws but before the due date of filing Income Tax Return under Section 143(1) as mistake apparent from record. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter amend or delete any grounds of appeal either before or during

Triveni Wires Private Limited, Nagpur vs. Additional Or Joint Or Deputy Or Assistant CIT Or Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 298/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Benjwala

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 272A(1)(d)

Company, filed its return of income electronically on 26/10/2018, disclosing nil income. The Assessing Officer processed the case of assessee under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") after accepting the return of income. The case was then selected under CASS. Notice dated 28/09/2019, was issued

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle ( Exemption ), Nagpur vs. M/S Shri Dadasaheb Gawai, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2/NAG/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 115BSection 12A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY

M/S Special Steels & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer. Ward 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1681/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT

M/S Special Steels & Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1680/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT

Guljeet Singh Saroya, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward 1 (4), Gurugram

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1022/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(24)Section 36(1)Section 37Section 43B

deduction towards employee’s contribution to PF & ESI made by the taxpayer becomes an incorrect claim warranting prima facie adjustment under section 143(1) o f the Act. The relevant findings in the aforesaid decision are as under:- "3.1. The Id. AR vehemently relied on the decision

Samit Ray, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 780/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 778/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Arati Ray,………………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Adopr8465R] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 779/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Mallika Roy,…………………………..……………Appellant 11/1, Dishari Bhawan, B.T. Road, Belghoria, Kolkata-700056 [Pan:Acgpr7888F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..…Respondent Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700107 & I.T.A. No. 780/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 1

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

Income Tax Act, but no such notices were issued meaning thereby the assessments have attained finality, which were passed under section 143(1) vide which returns of the assessees have been accepted. 11. The ld. Pr. Commissioner pointing out error in the assessment order and observed that the assessment orders ... Kabul Chawala [2015] 61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi). In this judgment, Hon’ble Delhi High Court has propounded that processment of the return under section 143(1) is to be construed as completion of the assessment. This judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been upheld

Malika Roy, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 779/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

Arati Ray, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cen. Cir. -3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 778/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

M/S Shree Balasaria Construction Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 554/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg&Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 194JSection 40a

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी संजय गग

The Coimbatore City Cooperative Bank Limited, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Non-Corporate Circle -I

The appeal of the assesse stands dismissed

ITA 264/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.264/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms.N.V.Lakshmi, Advocate

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(6)Section 80P(2)(d)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी ट