← 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)

Gayatri Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CPC/ITO.22(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 114/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.114/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2019-20) Gayatri Commercial Premises बिधम/ Cpc/Ito, 22 (1)(4) Co-Op, Society Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers Vs. Unit No. 102/103, Behind Lalbaugh Mumbai- 400034 Mittal Ind. Estate Andheri Kurla Andheri (East) Mumbai- 400059 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaag5064D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. N.R. Agarwal Revenue By: Shri. Krishna Kumar, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश/Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13-12-2022 For Ay 2019-20 Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 93,20,286/-. 2. The Assessee Society Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal Reads As Under: - “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.93,20,286/- As A Business Income In Order Passed U/S 143(1) & 154 Of The Act By Cpc. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Granting Deduction Under Mutuality Principal.” 3. The Regarding Ground No. 1, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee By Observing As Under: - “The Ld. Cit(A) Has Rejected The Assessees’S The Ground Of Appeal By Observing At Para No. 7 Of The Impugned Order As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. N.R. AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Kumar, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM

Home First Finance Company India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (CPC) & DCIT, Circle 10(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2109/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2109/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Home First Finance बिधम/ Acit, Cpc (Respondent Company India Limited No.1) Vs. 511, Acme Plaza 136, Dcit, Circle-10(1)(1), Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai (Respondent Andheri East-400059. No.2) 209, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacch3317E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pratik Shah Revenue By: Dr. Samuel Pitta (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.06.2022 For Ay. 2019-20. 2. Even Though, We Had Allowed The Appeal Vide Order Dated 28.09.2022, The Same Has Been Recalled In Ma No. 209/Mum/2023. The Only Issue Is Regarding The Disallowance Confirmed By Ld. Cit(A) Regarding Employee’S Contribution Towards Pf/Esi To The Tune Of Rs.42,34,050/-. 3. We Have Heard Both The Parties & Perused The Records. The Cpc Banglore Processed The Return Of Income U/S 143(1) Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Made Adjustment Of Rs.42,34,050/- U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act For Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Epf/Esic Beyond The Due Date As Prescribed In The Specified Act (Pf/Esic Acts). The Assessee Has Referred The Decision Of Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court In The Case

For Appellant: Shri Pratik ShahFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM

Mack Springs Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC, Bangalluru

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

ITA 1884/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1884/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2019-20) Mack Springs Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Adit Cpc, Bangaluru. 18 Khandelwal Mansion, Ac7(2)(1) Vs. Barrister Nath Paimarg, Aayakar Bhavan, 6Th Cotton Green, Mumbai- Floor, Bangaluru-560500. 400033, Maharashtra, India. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm8652J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi Revenue By: Shri Prakash D. Chougule (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 28.07.2021 For Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. It Is Noted That This Appeal Was Initially Disposed Off By This Tribunal On 09.05.2022 By Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee. However, The Same Have Been Recalled By This Tribunal On 13.04.2023 In The Light Of The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of M/S. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (448 Itr 518) (Sc). 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Had Filed The Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Which Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Raising A Demand Of Rs.2,35,771/- By Making An Addition/Disallowance Of Rs.8,58,426/- U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) On The Ground That The Employee’S Contributions To Provident Fund Was Remitted By Assessee After The Due Dates Prescribed

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Prakash D. Chougule (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY