← 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)

Tiruchengode Sakthi Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tiruchengode

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

ITA 2417/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2417/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2023-24 Tiruchengode Sakthi Spinners Private Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Limited, 67/3B, Melkallupalayam B.O., Ward 1, Namakkal 637 403. Tiruchengode. [Pan:Aaact7666A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. Cit (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.06.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Noida, For The Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Besides Challenging The Order Of The First Appellate Authority On Merits, The Assessee Vide Ground No. 5 Challenged Legal Issue That The First Appellate Authority Has Exceeded The Powers As Contemplated In Section 251(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (Virtual)
Section 143(1)Section 251Section 48

Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2 I.T.A. No.2417/Chny/25 3. We note that against the intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority and the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Noida remanded the matter to the file of the Jurisdictional ... cost of improvement with indexation in the relevant 4 I.T.A. No.2417/Chny/25 columns, which clearly shows that the adjustment made by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act is correct. She relied on the order of the Addl/JCIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused the material available

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Nariman Bhavan Premises Co Op Society Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3659/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon‟Ble Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2015-16 Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Nariman Bhavan Premises Co Op Room No. 118, 1St Floor, Society Ltd. G Block, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. 227 Backbay Reclamation, Bandra Kurla Complex (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai – 400051. [Pan: Aajn0320J] (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K. Gopal / Om Kandalkar For Revenue : Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Sr. Dr (Virtually Present) Date Of Hearing : 02-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02-12-2025 Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld. Cit(A)‟], Dated 14-08-2023, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That This Is A Recalled Matter Wherein Co-Ordinate Bench Vide Its Order Dated 22.09.2025 In Ma No. 244/M/2024 Has Recalled The Earlier Order Dated 08.05.2024 & The Matter Has Now Come Up For Adjudication Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal / Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Sr. DR
Section 3Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE HON‟BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C. V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT AND

Ankita Dash, Cuttack vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 412/CTK/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.412/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2024-2025) Ankita Dash Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Cuttack Plot No.C-436, Sector-6, Markat Nagar, Cda Colony, Bidanasi, Cuttack-453014 Pan No. :Alapd 8714 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-10, Mumbai, Dated 17.04.2025 For The Assessment Year 2024-2025. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 24 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Object To The Same. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 24 Days & Proceed To Dispose Off The Appeal. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Had Filed Her Return Of Income On 31.07.2024 & The Otp Verification Which Was Supposed To Have Been Done On 30.08.2024 Was Done On 31.08.2024. Consequently

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the intimation has been issued without complying with the provisions of 1st proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act, which requires that an intimation is to be issued to the assessee before the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act issued

Architecture and Engineering Consultancy Services Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 Bhuabenswar, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 343/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.340, 342, 343, 344 & 345/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Architecture & Engineering Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar Plot No.3443, Palasuni, Rasulgarh Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. :Aafca 8879 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017, Respectively. 2. All The Five Appeals Of The Assessee Is Barred By 04 Days Each. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Object To The Same. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 04 Days Each In Said Appeals & Proceed To Dispose Off All The Appeals Of The Assessee Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, ArsFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज

Architecture and Engineering Consultancy Services Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 342/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.340, 342, 343, 344 & 345/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Architecture & Engineering Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar Plot No.3443, Palasuni, Rasulgarh Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. :Aafca 8879 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017, Respectively. 2. All The Five Appeals Of The Assessee Is Barred By 04 Days Each. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Object To The Same. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 04 Days Each In Said Appeals & Proceed To Dispose Off All The Appeals Of The Assessee Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, ArsFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज

Architecture and Engineering Consultancy Services Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 340/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.340, 342, 343, 344 & 345/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Architecture & Engineering Vs Dcit, Central Circle-2, Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar Plot No.3443, Palasuni, Rasulgarh Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. :Aafca 8879 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Bhubaneswar, All Dated 31.03.2025 For The Assessment Years 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016 & 2016-2017, Respectively. 2. All The Five Appeals Of The Assessee Is Barred By 04 Days Each. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Object To The Same. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay Of 04 Days Each In Said Appeals & Proceed To Dispose Off All The Appeals Of The Assessee Under Consideration.

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena & Shri Mohit Sheth, ArsFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज