← 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)

Thenmaipakkam Primary Agricultural Co-Op Bank Ltd., Kancheepuram vs. It, Ncc-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2899/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.: 2899/Chny/2024 यनिाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Thenmelpakkam Perimary The Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Bank V. Non-Corp Circle-22(1), Limited, Thenmelpakkam Village Tambaram. Anjur Post, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu – 603 204. [Pan: Aacat7857-R] अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. G.Akash, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. M.D. Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Gurugram, Dated 28.06.2024 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 75 Days In Appeal Filed By The Assessee, For Which Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Reasons For Delay Has Been Filed. After Considering The Petition

For Appellant: Shri. G.Akash, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. M.D. Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80P

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘ए ’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एस एस विश्िनेत्र रवि

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(3)), Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai vs. Welspun Living Limited (Formerly Known As Welspun India Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4564/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am Dy. Cit, Central Circle-3(3) Welspun Living Limited (Formerly Room No. 406, Kautilya Bhawan, Known As Welspun India Ltd.) B Wing, 9Th Floor, Trade World, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Lower Parel, Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacw 1259 N (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Harsh M. Kapadia & Shri Ajay Nagpal Respondent By : Dr. Kishor Dhule Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Vp: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against Order Dated 12.07.2024 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai (‘Ld.Cit(A) For Short), Pertaining To Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. In Ground Nos. 1 & 2, The Revenue Has Challenged Deletion Of Disallowance Made U/S. 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Read With Rule 8D, While Computing Income Under The Normal Provisions Of The Act, As Also, While Computing Book Profit U/S. 115Jb Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Harsh M. Kapadia &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 115JSection 14ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM