← All Phrases

“Section 139(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 139Section 139(1)7,818 judgments

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI vs. DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6380/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumaracit Vs. Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary Central Circle-8 Flat No.1A Empire Estate, New Delhi Sultanpur, M.G. Road, New Delhi 110030 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaspk 9267 B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisha Maity, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 274

P a g e | 1 Dheeraj Chaudhary (AY 2011-12) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE

MANAV SEVA LOK KALYAN MAHASANGH,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE EXEMPTIOM, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 326/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roymanav Seva Lok Kalyan Vs Dcit/Acit, Circle Mahasangh, H.No. 32, Teka Exemption, Nagpur Naka, Asi Nagar, Nagpur. Pan : Aabtm 1643 C Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2026

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 44ASection 80G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT

RANJANA DEVI,MAUR MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 410/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjana Devi, C/O Jishu Trading Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Co. Maur Mandi, Punjab. Bathinda. [Pan:-Alzpd4607L] (Appellant) (Respondent) None. Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

MANOJ RAJARAM SHARMA,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8313/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmanoj Rajaram Ito - 42(3)(4), Sharma, Mumbai Office No. 615, 6Th Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, C- Floor, Centura Square 41-43, Avenue 3, Near It Park, Sg Barve Videsh Bhavan, G Road, Thane, Block, Bkc, Mumbai Maharashtra-400 604. – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Bytps1944K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suryadev Yadav, Shri Karan Hariya & Shri Prashant Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 4Section 44A

Case 2. The assessee is an individual and resident of India. The assessee filed his return of income for A.Y. 2020–21 under section 139(1) of the Act on 17.10.2020 declaring total income of Rs. 4,92,220/-. Subsequently, based on information available with the department, it was observed

H K ISPAT PVT. LTD.,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1392/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

brief facts of the case, as per AY 2015-16, are that the assessee company filed its original return of income under section 139(1) declaring total income at Nil. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in Kothi Group on 05.11.2020, wherein the assessee ... note that M/s Master Developers did not file the income tax returns for the assessment years 2008-09 to AY 2010-11 under section 139 (1) of the Act. But M/s Master Developers has filed the returns of income in response to the notice issued under section

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1278/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

brief facts of the case, as per AY 2015-16, are that the assessee company filed its original return of income under section 139(1) declaring total income at Nil. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in Kothi Group on 05.11.2020, wherein the assessee ... note that M/s Master Developers did not file the income tax returns for the assessment years 2008-09 to AY 2010-11 under section 139 (1) of the Act. But M/s Master Developers has filed the returns of income in response to the notice issued under section

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1277/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblesn

Section 250Section 68

brief facts of the case, as per AY 2015-16, are that the assessee company filed its original return of income under section 139(1) declaring total income at Nil. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in Kothi Group on 05.11.2020, wherein the assessee ... note that M/s Master Developers did not file the income tax returns for the assessment years 2008-09 to AY 2010-11 under section 139 (1) of the Act. But M/s Master Developers has filed the returns of income in response to the notice issued under section

COROMANDEL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 738/HYD/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Mar 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.738/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2015-16) Coromandel International Vs. Dcit, Limited, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aaacc7852K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri Sp Chidambaram, Advocate Assessee Represented By राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr Department Represented By सुनवाईसमा"तहोनेक""त"थ/ : 02/03/2026 Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/ : 18/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Coromandel International Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24/02/2025 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2015-16. Page 1 Of 17 Coromandel International Limited Vs. Dcit 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 250Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35

Court in PCIT v. Wipro Ltd. (supra) is concerned, the said decision relates to carry forward of loss without filing a return under section 139(1) r.w. section 139(3) of the Act. However, the present case relates to intra- Page 16 of 17 Coromandel International Limited Vs. DCIT year

KARMA ECOTECH PVT. LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRLE 13(1), NEW DLHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7431/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 80I

ITA No. 7431_DEL_2025_Karma Ecotech Pvt Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, E: NEW DELHI

TATHAGAT,NEW DELHI vs. AO CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTER, INCOME TAX DEPATMENT BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7273/DEL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

furnishing a declaration before the assessing officer and that too before the due date of filing the original return of income under section 139(1) are to be satisfied and both are mandatorily to be complied with. Accordingly, the question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue

TATHAGAT,NEW DELHI vs. AO CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTER, INCOME TAX DEPATMENT BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7272/DEL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

furnishing a declaration before the assessing officer and that too before the due date of filing the original return of income under section 139(1) are to be satisfied and both are mandatorily to be complied with. Accordingly, the question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue

TATHAGAT,NEW DELHI vs. AO CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7271/DEL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 11Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

furnishing a declaration before the assessing officer and that too before the due date of filing the original return of income under section 139(1) are to be satisfied and both are mandatorily to be complied with. Accordingly, the question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue

NITIN KHURANA,DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5264/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

Income Tax, Appeal ought to have appreciated that it is not mandatory to file Form 67 before filing return of income under section 139(1) to claim foreign tax credit as Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in case of delay in filing

DCM SHRIRAM INDUSTRIS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 2166/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagemdra Prasad & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(10)Section 14ASection 80Section 92C

shall be allowed unless the such claim is raised by a return of income filed on or before the due date mentioned in section 139(1) of the Act. He further placed reliance on the various judgments as listed below to contend that no additional claim should be allowed

TULAJABHAVANI MAHILA GRA SAH PATH SANSTA MARY.,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

ITA 192/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.192/Pun/2026 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Tulajabhavani Mahila Gra Sah Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pathsansta Mary Ward-1(1), Kolhapur Kodoli, At Post Kodoli, Tal. Panhala, Kolhapur-416114 Maharashtra Pan : Aabat4234H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.192/PUN/2026

VIVIDODDESH PRATHAMIKA GRAMEENA KRUSHI SAHAKAR SANGHA NIYAMIT HIRUR ,HAVERI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HAVERI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 2197/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Shambhu Kulkarni, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

case of the assessee, the return of income was filed as on 30th December 2012 which is after the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the CPC rightly disallowed the claim of . Page 3 of 7 deduction under section 80P of the Act invoking ... Power Systems Pvt Ltd) e-filed return for the A.Y. 2008-09 as on 30th September 2008 i.e. within the due date under section 139(1) of the Act. However, the verification/form ITR-v was filed on 31-03-2009. Therefore, relying upon the Board’s Notification

SAHYADRI ADIVASI BAHUVIDH SEVA SANGH ,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION , THANE

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

ITA 2466/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Sahyadri Adivasi Bahuvidh Income Tax Officer, Seva Sangh Exemption, Savarkar Road, Opp. S.T Mumbai Johns High School. Vs. Thane (West), Mumbai - 400601 (Pan: Aadts9375D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Suhas P. Bora, Ca Revenue : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Addl./Jcit (A)-2, Surat, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1072463266(1), Dated 23.01.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Thane, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 25.12.2018, For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K (SMC)” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

SHRI DHANALAXMI URBAN CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI

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

ITA 68/PAN/2026[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Mar 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 68/Pan/2026 (A.Y.2015-16) Shri Dhanalaxmi Urban Vs I T O, Cooperative Credit Society National E Assessment . Limited, Centre, 1574, Jain Peth, Athani, Delhi Belgaum-591304, Karnataka. Pan .No.Aaabs3373G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Chetan Chougle.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2026 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of Thenfac/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec147R.W.S144 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Sustaining The Denial Of Claim Of Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Act Applying The Provisions Of Section 80Ac Of The Act. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is A Credit Cooperative Society Engaged In Providing The Credit Facilities To Members. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Based On The Information & Data Analytics/ Cash Transactions Data

Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I T A. Nos

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. HI TECH ESTATES & PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 738/CTK/2025[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarita Nos.732, 733 & 734/Ctk/2025 Assessment Years 2006-07, 2005-06 & 2004-05 Acit, Circle-1(1), Rajdhani Systems & Estates Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bhubaneswar, Odisha- 751007. (Pan: Aabcr8271L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. D. Ojha & Abhishek Ojha, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT- DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 254(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR vs. HI TECH ESTATES & PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 737/CTK/2025[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarita Nos.732, 733 & 734/Ctk/2025 Assessment Years 2006-07, 2005-06 & 2004-05 Acit, Circle-1(1), Rajdhani Systems & Estates Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bhubaneswar, Odisha- 751007. (Pan: Aabcr8271L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. D. Ojha & Abhishek Ojha, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT- DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 254(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Showing 1–20 of 7,818 · Page 1 of 391

...