← 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)

Principle Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 13(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 280/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhprinciple Security & Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) Allied Services Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ground Limited, 707 Hubtown Floor, M.K. Road, Viva Shankar Wadi, New Marine Lines Western Express Mumbai – 400 020 Highway, Jogeshwari (East) Mumbai – 400060 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcp2691A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Rahul K. Hakani Respondent By : V.S. Mahajan Date Of Hearing 18.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Nfac, Delhi Dated 29.12.2022 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That The Intimation Issued By The Id Ao Cpc Bangalore W'S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Erroneous / Without Jurisdiction Since Additions On Issues Where Two Views Are Possible Cannot Be Made. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.1,59,10,546/- U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act Without Appreciating The Fact That The Employees Contribution To Pf & Esic Was Deposited Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return. 3. The Appellant Prays That The Adjustment Made In The Intimation Order U/S143(1) Of The Act May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Rahul K. HakaniFor Respondent: V.S. Mahajan
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

P a g e | 1 Principle Security and Allied Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) IN THE INCOME

Nano Agro Science Co Op Society Ltd, Rajkot vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 311/RJT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 159 & 160/Rjt/2021 & 311/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2015-16) Nano Agro Science Co.Op. The Income-Tax Officer बनाम/ Society Ltd. Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot Vs. Plot No.1384, Lodhika Gidc, Metoda Dist. Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaabn0532G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 13/04/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 21/04/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 05.10.2021 (For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17) & 20.10.2022 (2015-16) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (In Short ‘Nfac) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 04.03.2020 (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 271B

seeds filed its return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs.Nil for the year under consideration, which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 28.05.2014. However, no scrutiny assessment has been made by the department. During the course of assessment proceedings, it appears from

Nano Agro Science Co Op Society Ltd, Rajkot vs. ITO Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 160/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 159 & 160/Rjt/2021 & 311/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2015-16) Nano Agro Science Co.Op. The Income-Tax Officer बनाम/ Society Ltd. Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot Vs. Plot No.1384, Lodhika Gidc, Metoda Dist. Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaabn0532G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 13/04/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 21/04/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 05.10.2021 (For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17) & 20.10.2022 (2015-16) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (In Short ‘Nfac) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 04.03.2020 (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 271B

seeds filed its return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs.Nil for the year under consideration, which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 28.05.2014. However, no scrutiny assessment has been made by the department. During the course of assessment proceedings, it appears from

Nano Agro Science Co. Op. Society Ltd., Rajkot vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 159/RJT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 159 & 160/Rjt/2021 & 311/Rjt/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2015-16) Nano Agro Science Co.Op. The Income-Tax Officer बनाम/ Society Ltd. Ward-1(2)(2), Rajkot Vs. Plot No.1384, Lodhika Gidc, Metoda Dist. Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaabn0532G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr.D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 13/04/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 21/04/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Three Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 05.10.2021 (For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2016-17) & 20.10.2022 (2015-16) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (In Short ‘Nfac) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 04.03.2020 (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 271B

seeds filed its return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs.Nil for the year under consideration, which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 28.05.2014. However, no scrutiny assessment has been made by the department. During the course of assessment proceedings, it appears from