“Section 139(1)”

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

The decision most relied on for Section 139(1) is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 139(1)

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court

1,842

citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court

1,673

citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court

1,629

citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court

1,392

citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court

1,158

citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders

349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court

956

citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows

73 Taxmann.com 241 · 2016 · High Court

791

citing judgments

A penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing incorrect particulars of income.

Judgments citing Section 139(1)

Parshottambhai Shamjibhai Gajjar, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 588/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Parshottambhgai Shamjibhai Gajjar The Ito, Ward-4(2)(4) 75, Shastrinagar Vs. Now Ward-4(2)(3) Nr. Anandbaug Society Ahmedabad. Ghatlodia Ahmedabad. Pan : Bhtpg 0081 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘SMC’ अहमदाबाद

Semantic Square LLP, Ameenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sangareddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 719/HYD/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Admittedly, the assessee has filed it’s return of income for the year under consideration on or before the due date provided under section 139(1) of the Act, which is evident from the date of filing of the return on 31.12.2020. Further, the assessee has filed Form ... which is beyond the due date provided under section 139(1) of the Act. The return of income filed by the assessee has been processed under section 143(1) of the Act 8 ITA.Nos.717, 718 and 719/Hyd./2025 on 06.04.2021 and the Assessing Officer-CPC denied the credit

Semantic Square LLP, Ameenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sangareddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 718/HYD/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Semantic Square LLP, Ammenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sanga Reddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 717/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Nishant Chennadi, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 470/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, C. Maheswar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD

Salasar Hanuman Agrotech Foods Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 224/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sumitha Parmata, SR-DR

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2021–22 on 28.02.2022, within the extended due date for filing return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). In the said return, the assessee opted for taxation under the concessional tax regime provided under Section ... enumerated in para 3 of the circular i.e. (a) that the return of income was filed on or before the due date under Section 139(1) of ITA No.224/Hyd/2025 4 the Act, (b) that the assessee had opted for Section 115BAA in item (e) of “Filing Status” in “Part

Telangana Power Generation Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 724/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, M Chandramouleswar RaoFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 43BSection 53

before the due date provided under the respective Act or on or before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the Assessee has filed relevant evidences including bank statements and as per the details filed by the assessee ... previous year and was paid on or before the due date for furnishing return of income of the previous year under section 139(1) of the Act and reported sum of Rs.21,92,43,000/- towards employers contribution to superannuation fund. The assessee had also reported the not paid

C5 Infra Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 332/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.332/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) C5 Infra (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Secunderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Aafcc2138K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10/03/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, For The A.Y.2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Narender Kumar Naik

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(3)

ITA No 332 of 2023 C5 Infra P Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX

Mohammed Gyasuddin, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 30(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1053/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No. 1053/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Mohammed Gyasuddin,…………………………Appellant 3, Dent Mission Road, Kolkata-700023, West Bengal [Pan:Afvpg2465H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………….……….....Respondent Ward-30(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road, Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Abhijit Adhikari, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

ITA No. 1053/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Mohammed Gyasuddin IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh

Strides Pharma Science Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 769/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2380/Chny/2018 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of (Merged With M/S. Strides Shasun Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Now Known As Strides Pharma Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Science Ltd.,) Chennai. No.28, Batra Centre, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aadcs 8104P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT

Section 10B

rationalized to Section 40(a)(i) of the Act by extending the payment of TDS before due date specified in section 139(1), which was already available for payments covered u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act to residents and therefore, same should be read as curative in nature

DCIT Circle-15 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd Now Know As Strides Pharma Science Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 5404/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT

Section 10B

Strides Pharma Science Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC - 6 (2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 2335/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT

Section 10B

DCIT-15(3)(2), Chennai vs. M/S.Shasun Pharmaceuticals Private Limited (Merged With Strides Shasun Limited), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 4945/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT

Section 10B

Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of assessee for A

ITA 2380/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Maithili, Addl. CIT

Section 10B

Subhash Silk Mills Limited, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer Cirle -11(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse bearing

ITA 3385/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjeesubhash Silk Mills Limited Vs Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax G-15, Prem Kutir, 177 Marine (Osd), Circle 11(2)(2), Mumbai Drive, Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 020 Pan: Aaacs9966J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Govind PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary – Sr AR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

committing an additional default. Considering the income level during the relevant assessment year, the assessee was otherwise liable to file the return under Section 139(1) of the Act, which he failed to do. The concealment of income was detected by the revenue authorities, and the assessee did not file

Greenovoc Specialty Coatings Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3284/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 115BSection 143(1)

section 115BAB of the Act. It is further submitted that, the assessee filed return of income within the due date as per section 139(1) of the Act, and having accepted the said option in the intimation the CPC cannot compute tax at any other rate other than

Neon Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 13(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2329/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Neon Properties Pvt. Ltd. Ito 13(1)(1) 501, Krystal, 206, Waterfield Aayakar Bhavan Road Bandra West Vs. M.K. Road Mumbai-400 050. Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Aaacn4266E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri A.N. Shah

Section 115BSection 115ISection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM

Arvind Bansal, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 44(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5495/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumararvind Bansal, Vs. Ito, 15, Second Floor, Sainik Ward-44(1), Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpb8185E

For Appellant: Sr. Pranshu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149ASection 68

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL

Satish Narayan Tarale, Belgavi vs. Intl.Taxation Ward, Panaji

ITA 55/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 055/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Satish Narayan Tarale 35, Laxmi Narayan Niwas, 2Nd Stage, Hanuman Nagar, Belgaum-590001. Pan : Afkpt0032Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenges Din & Order No Itba/Ast/F/144/2024- 25/1072202908(1) Dt. 15/01/2025 Passed By The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] U/S 144 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Anent To Assessment Year 2019-20 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 253(6)Section 3Section 4Section 6(6)Section 69A

Satish Narayan Tarale Vs ITO ITA Nos.055/PAN/2025 AY: 2019-20 15. In adjudicating the issues we note that, in terms of section 139(1)(b) of the Act, a person being other than a company or a firm is not under obligation to file return of income if total income ... reproducing section in verbatim in the context of alleged amount of escapement of income it shall suffice to state that, conjoint reading of section 139(1)(b) and 149(1)(b) of the Act plainly suggests that, the limit of escaped income set in section

Maleckunnel Philip Varghese, Sambalpur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur

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

ITA 260/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.257/Ctk/2025 आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.259/Ctk/2025 आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.260/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Maleckunnel Philip Varghese Vs Dcit, Central Circle, Sambalpur At/Po/Ps: Ainthapali, Dist : Sambalpur-768004 Pan No. :Abvpv 8418 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh P.K.Mishra & Baidyanath Behera, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025

For Appellant: Sh P.K.Mishra & Baidyanath Behera, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153B(1)(b)Section 153C

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