← 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)

La Kozy Builders LLP, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-21(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2954/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 23Section 23(5)Section 5

assessee filed its original return of income on 17.10.2016 declaring a total income of %.87,30,170/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) on 06.01.2017. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and notices under section 143

M/S. Merico Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. - 35, Mumbai

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

ITA 2800/MUM/2003[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 1998-1999

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Bleand

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 37Section 80Section 80I

lacs and reduced the 801A deduction to %.1816.31 lacs as against the original deduction of %.1951.62 lacs. Accordingly, the return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) without any adjustments. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143

Compact Texfab Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 6(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9524/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshcompact Texfab Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 1032, H. No. 66, Gali No. Ward-6(2), 33, Jafrabad, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcc3621P Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 03/04/2024

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI M

Warm Forgings P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 1148/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1148/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Warm Forgings P. Ltd., Dcit Plot No.117 & 118, A-3, Vs. Circle 27(1), Sector-11, Rohini, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aabcc7684C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68Section 69C

I.T.A.No.1148/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Chiripal Industries Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 708/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 708/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Chirpal Industries Limited, D.C.I.T, Chirpal House, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2), Shivranjani Cross Road, Ahmedabad. Satellight, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaacc8513B

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr.DR
Section 116JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 80Section 80I

application to the fact situation of the case. Even assuming for the sake of argument that if an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act is considered to be an order of assessment, in the subsequent reassessment proceeding, the original assessment proceeding get effaced and the Assessing Officer ... 500/161 Taxman 316 (SC) and reached a conclusion that even assuming for the sake of argument that if an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act is considered to be an order of assessment, in the subsequent reassessment proceedings, the original assessment proceedings gets effaced and the Assessing Officer

The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. The Sardar Patel Co Opertaive Credit Society Limited, Vijapur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is

ITA 526/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Hasmukh V Doshi & Sh. Mehal H DoshiFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Chavda, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

under section 80P of the Act. The assessee’s return of income was processed by Revenue under section 143(1) of the 1961 Act, and thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for framing limited scrutiny assessment through CASS. The notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1

The ACIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. The Sardar Patel Co Opertaive Credit Society Limited, Vijapur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 is

ITA 525/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Hasmukh V Doshi & Sh. Mehal H DoshiFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Chavda, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

under section 80P of the Act. The assessee’s return of income was processed by Revenue under section 143(1) of the 1961 Act, and thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for framing limited scrutiny assessment through CASS. The notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1

Superwell Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 22(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 298/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234BSection 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA

Maheswari Mining & Energy Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1220/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2016-17 Maheswari Mining & Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aagcm0805N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar& B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: /04/2022

For Appellant: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar&For Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITO, International Taxation Ward1(2), Chennai vs. Rajamanickam Arulselvan, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 479/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.479/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & C.O. No. 44/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 479/Chny/2023] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Rajamanickam Arulselvan, 65, Defence Officer Colony, 2Nd International Taxation Ward 1(2), Bsnl Building Tower-1, 4Th Floor, Avenue, 6Th Cross Street, Guindy, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai 600 006. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aappa2346C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha, G.: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, Dated 22.02.2023 Passed In Ita No. 10039/Cit(A)-16/2012-2013 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On The Facts, The Merits Of The Case & Provisions Of Law As Well & Hence Unsustainable. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Failing To Appreciate That When The Assessee Had Applied For Conversion Of The Vacant Land Into A Plotted

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 45(3)

income for the assessment year 2013-14 admitting total income of ₹.12,63,260/-. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] on 17.10.2014. The case has been, subsequently, reopened under section ... opinion without there being any fresh tangible material came to the possession of the Assessing Officer after completion of original assessment order under section 143(1) of the Act. The assessee also challenged computation of long term capital gain by invoking the provisions of section

Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Administrative Block vs. ITO Exemption Ward, Cr Building

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 740/JPR/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Apr 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sogani (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

trust is an State Government Controlled working for the aid and assistance of the poor, needy and downtrodden. On receipt of intimation under section 143(1) of the IT Act, 1961, the assessee filed a rectification application under the impression that the authorities will look into the entirety

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 573/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessee, and that in any case adjustment by way of denial of deduction u/s 80P(2) was out of the purview of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 9. He, thereafter, pointed out that the Assessing Officer responded to the same by staying that the assessee had claimed deduction

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 572/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessee, and that in any case adjustment by way of denial of deduction u/s 80P(2) was out of the purview of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 9. He, thereafter, pointed out that the Assessing Officer responded to the same by staying that the assessee had claimed deduction

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 571/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessee, and that in any case adjustment by way of denial of deduction u/s 80P(2) was out of the purview of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 9. He, thereafter, pointed out that the Assessing Officer responded to the same by staying that the assessee had claimed deduction

Shree Jay Limbach Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 570/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 28Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

assessee, and that in any case adjustment by way of denial of deduction u/s 80P(2) was out of the purview of Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 9. He, thereafter, pointed out that the Assessing Officer responded to the same by staying that the assessee had claimed deduction

Barbate Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistant Directore of Income Tax, CPC, Banglore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.50/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2018-19 Barbate Automotive India The Assistant Director Of Pvt. Ltd., V Income Tax, Cpc, Income K.H.No.63/6, Arya Cars, S Tax Department, Bhandara Road, Kapsi, Bengaluru – 560500. Nagpur – 441202. Pan: Aadcb1189M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rachit Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)[Nfac]Dated 21.12.2022 For A.Y.2018-19 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, Dated 28.02.2020 Passed By Asst. Commissioner Of Barbate Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., [A]

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 43B

appreciate the fact that the amended provision having been given effect only from 01.04.2021 by way of amendment of sub clause (iv) of Section 143(1), therefore adjustment prior to A.Y 20-21 on account of increase in income is not in accordance with law. 3. That the CIT(Appeals ... kindly be deleted.” 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is observed that order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed by ACIT(CPC) disallowing Rs.1,48,006/- which was employee’s share of contribution towards ESI/PF as the impugned

Mariamma Joseph, Kottayamn vs. The ACIT, Central Circle, Kottayam

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is decided on the aforesaid terms

ITA 672/COCH/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Mar 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasmariamma Joseph Asst. Cit, Central Circle Hotel Floral Park Kottayam 686001 Gandhinagar Vs. Kottayam 686008 [Pan:Accpj9135F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 210Section 234Section 234BSection 234B(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Mahesh Ram Vittal, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-5(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1078/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Chaugule, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD

Aspen International Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3465/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -23(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpsaru Diamonds, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3400/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL