← 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)

Ksb Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1313/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Ksb Limited The Assistant Director Of 601 Tower 1, Income Tax, Cpc Runawal R Square, Vs. Bengaluru, Lbs Road, Karnataka- 560500. Mulund (W.)- 400080. Pan: Aaack5918J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Tiwari A/W. Shri Mihir Chitaliya, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das- Cit D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 06 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 06 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The ‘Act’ In Short] Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1060135975(1) Dated 25/01/2024 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised By The Appellant: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ksb Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Appellant") Has Preferred An Appeal Before Your

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari a/w. Shri Mihir Chitaliya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das- CIT D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 35DSection 43B

Commissioner of Income Tax, ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Vishakhapatnam (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned CIT (A) under section 250 read with order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The learned CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant and holding that ... learned CIT (A) has: 1. Erred in considering the appeal filed by the Appellant against the intimation order under section 143(1) as infructuous 1.1. The learned CIT (A) has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law in considering the appeal filed by the Appellant against

Thyssenkrupp Uhde India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1030/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Thyssenkrupp Uhde Deputy Commissioner Of India Private Limited Income Tax- 15(3)(1) Uhde House, Room No.460, Vs. 4Th Floor, L.B.S. Marg, Vikhroli (W.), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- 400083. M. K. Road, Pan: Aaacu1416H Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri M. M. Golvala A/W. Shri Hormuzd Jamshedji, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 06 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 06 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The ‘Act’ In Short] Vide Its Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1059614356(1) Dated 11/01/2024 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2 M/S. Thyssenkrupp Uhde India Private Limited

For Appellant: Shri M. M. Golvala a/w. Shri HormuzdFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), SR. D.R
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

This appeal is filed against the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal Addl./JCIT (A)-2, Hyderabad against an intimation under section 143(1) and relates to Assessment Year 2017-18. 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming disallowance under section 36(1 ... that since the notice of proposed adjustment was never served on the appellant and, therefore, the adjustment made in the intimation issued under section 143(1) should be deleted. 10) The learned Assessing Officer erred in withdrawing TDS credit to the tune of Rs.1,47,92,761/-, in contravention