← All Phrases

“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)

Ambalapad Service Co Operative Bank Ltd No 759, Kundukad, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thrissur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 78/COCH/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ambalapad Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Xi/57, Kundukad P.O., Thrissur 680028 [Pan: Aadaa9298G] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Thrissur .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Ramdas M., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 03.12.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Classified As Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society. The Appellant Had Not Filed Regular Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Income

For Appellant: Shri Ramdas M., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271BSection 44A

classified as primary agricultural co-operative society. The appellant had not filed regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The Income 2 Ambalapad Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Thrissur (hereinafter called

Ambalappuzha Service Co-Operative Society Ltd, Ambalappuzha vs. ITO, Ward -2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed the and stay application stands dismissed

ITA 373/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm & Sa No. 53/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ambalapuzha Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Kakkazham, Vandanam, Alappuzha 688005 [Pan: Aacak0787F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer. Ward-2, Alappuzha .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 30.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69ASection 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

business of providing credit facilities to its members. The return of income for AY 2015-16 was not filed under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The ITO, Ward-2, Alappuzha (hereinafter called "the AO"), based on the information that the appellant ... credit co-operative society. It is admitted fact that no return of income was filed by the appellant either under the provisions of section 139(1) or in response to the notice issued u/s. Ambalapuzha Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. 148 of the Act. It only amounts that there

The Aroor Central Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO, Ward -2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeals and stay applications filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 372/COCH/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

society. The appellant is engaged in the business of providing credit to its members. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant. The ITO, Ward-5, Alappuzha (hereinafter called "the AO"), based

The Aroor Central Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Alappuzha vs. ITO, Ward -5, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeals and stay applications filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 371/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Varma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

society. The appellant is engaged in the business of providing credit to its members. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed by the appellant. The ITO, Ward-5, Alappuzha (hereinafter called "the AO"), based

Chingoli Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Chingoli vs. Income Tax Officer, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 360/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bijumon Antony, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA Nos. 359 & 360/Coch/2025 Assessment Years

Chingoli Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Chingoli vs. Income Tax Officer, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 359/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bijumon Antony, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA Nos. 359 & 360/Coch/2025 Assessment Years

Good Shephered Central School Trust, Thrissur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Thrissur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 328/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.J. Romid, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

that the appellant is a charitable trust founded with the object of imparting education. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2015-16. The ITO (Exemption), Thrissur (hereinafter called "the AO"), based

Good Shephered Central School Trust, Thrissur vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Thrissur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 327/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.J. Romid, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

that the appellant is a charitable trust founded with the object of imparting education. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2015-16. The ITO (Exemption), Thrissur (hereinafter called "the AO"), based

Engandiyur Farmers Service Co-Operative Bank Limited No F 977, Kundaliyur vs. Income Tax Officer, Guruvayur

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

ITA 262/COCH/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2023-24 Engandiyur Farmers Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Door No. Xiv/289, Kundaliyur P.O., Thrissur [Pan: Aaaae7670D] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps .......... Respondent Guruvayur Appellant By: Shri Ramdas M., Ca Respondent By: Shri Sundarasan S., Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ramdas M., CAFor Respondent: Shri Sundarasan S., CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM

Palmshore Hotels Private Limited, Thiruvananthapuram vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 983/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 43B

provisions of Companies Act, 2013. It is engaged in the business of running hotels. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2017-18. However, the AO, on 2 Palmshore Hotels Pvt. Ltd. receipt

Sh. Harwant Singh Grewal, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward-7(4), Ludhiana

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

ITA 594/CHANDI/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 594/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Harwant Singh Grewal, The Ito, B-Xxxiv, # 8913, Durga Puri, Vs Ward 7(4), Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Adcpg7982Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 54BSection 54F

verification of the same that the amount was spent for construction before the due date of filing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the relevant assessment year 2013- 14. The assessee has not deposited any sum in any such bank ... institution specified by the Government for this purpose before the due date of ITR under section 139(1). The assessee has claimed deduction u/s 54F to the extent of Rs.35,87,266/-. The same is rejected and the amount of Rs.3 5,87,266/- is added in the total income

Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University, Nashik vs. Exemption Circle, A Bad, Aurangabad

ITA 505/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

Anant Changu Mokal, Dhatav, Kolad Roha vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 2341/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2341/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Anant Changu Mokal, V National Faceless Dhatav Midc Colony, Kokad S Assessment Centre. Roha, Roha Av S.O., Raigarh – 402116. Pan: Ahnpm1926F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ca Naina Chaurasia – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/06/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 20.09.2024For Assessment Year2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Ctt(A) Nfac Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming Addition Of Rs.1,38,86,973/- As Interest Income Received On Account Of Compulsory Land Acquisition U/S 28 Of The Land Acquisition Act, Thus

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 145ASection 194ASection 250oSection 28Section 34Section 56(2)(viii)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”ए” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Raghu Satyanaryana Kollu, Kodad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 413/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 250

High Court answered the aforesaid issue, and held, that the “return of income” filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated under Section 139(1) or Section 139(4) or Section 142(1) or Section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon provided further proceedings in relation to such

Raghu Satyanaryana Kollu, Kodad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 412/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 250

High Court answered the aforesaid issue, and held, that the “return of income” filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated under Section 139(1) or Section 139(4) or Section 142(1) or Section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon provided further proceedings in relation to such

Telangana State Medical Council, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, (Exemptions) Ward-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 399/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(3)

submitted that Section 12A(1)(ba) of the Act mandates timely filing of the return of income within the due date under Section 139(1) of the Act. Since the assessee failed to comply with this mandatory condition, and no condonation was obtained from the CBDT under Section ... admitted fact that the assessee filed its return of income and audit report in Form 10B on 31.03.2019, whereas the due date under Section 139(1) was 31.10.2018. Further, no application for condonation of delay was made by the assessee to the CBDT under Section 119(2)(b). Section

DCIT, Central Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Department vs. N T Agro Food Products, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1480/KOL/2024[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), N.T. Agro Food Products, Kolkata Village-Deshapara, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Po-Dearah Nasibpur, 110, Shantipally, Pin-700107, Vs. Dist. Hooghly, Pin-712223 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaifn2002M Assessee By : Shri Miraz D. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Miraz D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborty, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, AM

DCIT, CC-2(2), Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Aryan Mining and Trading Corporation Limited, Hide Lane

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Aryan Mining & Trading Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Corporation Limited, 110, Shantipally, 4 Th Floor, P-1, Hide Lane, Johar Building, Vs. Pin-700073, West Bengal Pin-700073, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aadca7247B Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tulsian, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, AM

Income Tax Officer, Ward-62(1), New Delhi vs. Girish Kumar Gupta, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5366/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 148Section 68Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni, Margao vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 50/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavankumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 050/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Ojas Shashikant Kulkarni A-3/A-4, C.D. Neighbourhood, Swami Chinmayanand Marg, Gogoi, Salcete, Margao, Goa Pan : Dkzpk5732F . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Director Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 19/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; Assessee’S Captioned Appeal Impugns Din & Order 1072026383(1) Dt. 09/01/2025 Passed By Addl//Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-2, Jaipur [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Intimation Dt. 26/11/2021 Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act By Asstt. Direction Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr D.E. Robinson [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVANKUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G