← 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)

Jan Sewa Khadi Gramodhog Sewa Sansthan, Etawah vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 254/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.254/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Jan Seva Khadi Gramodhog Adit (Cpc_ Sewa Sansthan Bengaluru बनाम/ Vs. 64, Katra Sewa Kali Etawah 206001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaaj-6502-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Navin Gargh (Advocate) - Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Navin Gargh (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)

means that it covers all the provisions of section 139 of the Act and it is not limited to section 139(1) of the Act. Hence, we allow the appeal of assessee and direct the AO to allow exemption u/s.11 of the Act in this case of the assessee ... means that it covers all the provisions of section 139 of the Act and it is not limited to section 139(1) of the Act. We find that similar facts exist before us. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to allow impugned deduction to the assessee. 4. The appeal stand allowed

Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust, Adipur vs. The ITO (Exemption), Ward(1), Rajkot

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.902/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust The Ito (Exemption) बनाम Plot No.1, Dc-2 Ward-1 Rambaug Road Rajkot. Vs. Ward-6A, Adipur. Pan : Aabts 1102 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Chennai[In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 02.05.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Intimation Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Cpc) U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 31.10.2015. Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust 2 2. Grievances Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN

Shri Chetan Harilal Bhalodiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee ( in ITA Nos

ITA 25/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 429, 430/Rjt/2017 & 358/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2011-12) Prashant Ramjibhai Kandoliya, Income Tax Officer, Sanjay & Company, Premjis, Ward-2(1)(4), Vs. Rajput Para Main Road, Rajkot Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Auhpk6407E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 16 To 25/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2006-07 To 2015-16) Chetankumar Haribhai The Acit, Bhalodiya, Prop. Of Yash Central Circle-1 Vs. Enterprise, 202, Darshan Rajkot Complex, Opp. Bombay Garage, Gondal Road, Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adypb7423K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sunny Mehta, A.R. राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Captioned 13 Appeals Filed By The Different Assessees, Pertaining To Different Assessment Years, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn

For Appellant: Shri Sunny Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-D.R
Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL

Shri Chetan Harilal Bhalodiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee ( in ITA Nos

ITA 24/RJT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 429, 430/Rjt/2017 & 358/Rjt/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2011-12) Prashant Ramjibhai Kandoliya, Income Tax Officer, Sanjay & Company, Premjis, Ward-2(1)(4), Vs. Rajput Para Main Road, Rajkot Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Auhpk6407E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 16 To 25/Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2006-07 To 2015-16) Chetankumar Haribhai The Acit, Bhalodiya, Prop. Of Yash Central Circle-1 Vs. Enterprise, 202, Darshan Rajkot Complex, Opp. Bombay Garage, Gondal Road, Rajkot "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adypb7423K (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sunny Mehta, A.R. राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Captioned 13 Appeals Filed By The Different Assessees, Pertaining To Different Assessment Years, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn

For Appellant: Shri Sunny Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-D.R
Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL