← 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)

Sanjeeva Reddy Talla, Medchal Mandal vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1201/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. Maheswar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 69A

reason that in the original assessment for the year 1962-63, a mistake at crept in while making out interest under Section 139(1)(iii). Thereafter, the Income Tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee proposing to rectify the mistake under Section 154 and calling upon the objections

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(4), Hyderabad vs. Ace Constructions, Hyderabad

ITA 54/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234ASection 271ASection 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(4), Hyderabad vs. Royal Engineering, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 44/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.44/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Royal Engineering Income Tax Hyderabad Central Circle-3(4) [Pan : Aatfr9338R] Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 153CSection 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(1), Gangtok, Sikkim vs. Nirmala Sharma, Soreng, West Sikkim

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2298/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 147Section 250Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'ए' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री प्रदीप

Nirmala Sharma, Gangtok vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Gangtok

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2227/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 147Section 250Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'ए' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री प्रदीप

Ehsaas, Gwalior vs. CIT (Appeals), NFAC (Delhi)

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5/AGR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

## IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "SMC" BENCH, AGRA ## BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Sushila Choudhary, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

ITA 638/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Katariya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Badgujar, Addl.CIT (Thr. V.C.)
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 292BSection 69A

record is that the assessee had not filed its original Return of Income for A.Y. 2013-14 as per the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. As per the information available on records, the assessee was having bank account with Andhra Bank, Engineers Colony Sirsi Road, Jaipur. During ... following points: i. The assessee has not filed its original Return of Income for A.Y. 2013- 14 as per the provisions of section 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (the Act.). ii. The Assessing officer on the basis of information available via ITS details that the assessee has made

Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1054/JPR/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Jatin Garg, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1019/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69

loan on surmises and conjectures. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income under Section 139(1) on 18/07/2018 at the total income of Rs. 3,11,370/-. Consequent upon search under section 132(1) of the Act, notice under section

Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, R-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1035/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 14ASection 35Section 43B

ITA No.1035/Ahd/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Page 1 of 18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

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

ITA 2817/PUN/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2816

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

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

ITA 2816/PUN/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2816

National Association of Interlocking Surgeons, Solapur, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune, Maharashtra

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

ITA 2560/PUN/2024[AAATN9300L]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2816

Avuti Bhanuprasad, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

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

ITA 69/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Avuti Bhanuprasad, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Mahabubnagar. Mahabubnagar. Pan : Bqspb5604A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Karthik Manickam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya KumarFor Respondent: Shri Karthik Manickam, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

that assessee, an individual, did not file the return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 within the due date under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer received information regarding certain bank transactions and issued a notice under Section 142(1

ACIT., Exemptions Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Promotion Council of India, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 1199/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. Pharmaceuticals Export Of Income Tax, Promotion Council Of India, Exemptions, Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcp4643C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rv. Chalam, C.A. Revenue By: Shri B. Balakrishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri RV. Chalam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Balakrishna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

future application to charitable 12 purposes has to be exercised by the trust in writing before the expiry of the time allowed under Section 139(1) for furnishing the return of income, as provided in Explanation (iib) below Section 11(1) of the Act. In respect of all the years

Suryavanshi Kshatriya Sahakari Patpedhi Maryadit, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4402/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Sharma, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. D/R
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 234ASection 80ASection 80P

fact that the appellant has filed the return of income on 30-10-2018 and as per clause (a) of explanation 2 to section 139(1) of the Act the due date for submission of return is 30-09-2018 which was extended up to 31-10-2018 by circular ... well as various reports of audit pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-2019 for assessees covered under clause (a) of Explanation 2 of section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act), the Board, in partial modification of its order dated 24.09.2018 in file of even number, hereby, further extends

Surendra Kumar Mishra, Allahabad vs. ACIT, Cir-2, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 140/ALLD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2002-03 Surendra Kumar Mishra, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 794A/1, Sohabatiyabagh, Income Tax, Circle-2, Allahabad Allahabad-211006, U.P. Pan:Aibpm4858R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Under Section 250 R.W.S. 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 26.10.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The 'Additional Ground' Relating To Non-Issuance Of Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Act, Raised Before The Appellate Authority During The Course Of First Round Of Litigation, Which Has Been Remanded Back By The Hon'Ble Itat In Terms Of Order Dated 09.11.2012, By Observing That The Return Filed By The Appellant In Terms Of Letter Dated 10.11.2008 As Not A Valid Return In Compliance To Notice Dated 11.02.2008 Issued Under Section 148 Of The Act, As The Said Letter Was Filed By The Appellant After The Time Limit Of 30 Days Provided To Do So In Terms Of Notice Dated 11.02.208 Issued Under Section 148 Of The Act. 2. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Observing That The Appellant Could Not Have Demand For Issuance Of Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The 1 Surendra Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 69C

goes to the very root of the assessment. The provisions of the Income Tax Act are quite clear that a return under section 139(1) can only be filed before the due date of filing of that return. However, if a person fails to file a return under section 139 ... Surendra Kumar Mishra provisions of section 142(1) read, that where a person has not made a return within the time allowed under section 139(1) or before the end of the relevant assessment year, a notice may be served upon him to furnish a return of his income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -1(2), Nagpur vs. Vidarbha Infotech Private Limited, Nagpur

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 44ASection 69C

additions made in the assessment order passedu/s 147 of the Act on 25/12/2018. Facts of the case: Assessee filed return of income under section 139(1) of I T Act on 17/10/2016 declaring income of Rs.4,60,44,360/–. Case was selected for scrutiny and various notices were issued which ... addition amounting to ` 20,67,364 primarily holding that the assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 under section 139(1) of the Act on 17/10/2016, declaring total income at ` 4,60,44,360, and the assessment under section 143(3) was completed on 25/12/2018

Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Hinganghat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Wardha

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 569/NAG/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

deduction under chapter VIA is allowable if the claim of the same is made in the return of income either filed under section 139(1) or filed under section 139(4) or in response to notice u/s 142(1) or filed before completion of assessment. The specific disallowance of claims ... were made by the assessee in a return of income filed by him. That return can be under sections 139(1), 139(4), 142(1) or section 148, and to be valid, had to be filed within the due date contemplated under those provisions. Under section 80A(5), the claim

Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Hinganghat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Wardha

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 568/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suyash RankaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56Section 80P

deduction under chapter VIA is allowable if the claim of the same is made in the return of income either filed under section 139(1) or filed under section 139(4) or in response to notice u/s 142(1) or filed before completion of assessment. The specific disallowance of claims ... were made by the assessee in a return of income filed by him. That return can be under sections 139(1), 139(4), 142(1) or section 148, and to be valid, had to be filed within the due date contemplated under those provisions. Under section 80A(5), the claim