← 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)

Punjailakalamangalam Primary Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. K 484, Erode vs. ACIT (OSD) Ward 2(3), Erode

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2843/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2843/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Punjailakalamangalam Primary The Acit Agricultural Co-Op Credit Society Ward 2(3), बनाम/ Ltd. K484 Erode. 1, Karur Main Road, Vs. Ganapathipalayam, Modakkurichi, Erode – 638 153. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aabap-8122-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D. Gowda (Addl.Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-01-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D. Gowda (Addl.CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी

Raj Kumar, Chapra vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2), Chapra

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.351/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Raj Kumar………………………….....…..…………………....Appellant Mohalla – Gudari Bazar, Bhagwan Bazar, Daulatganj, Chapra (Saran), Bihar-841301. [Pan: Cikpk8268A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2), Chapra....….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 27, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 30, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. No One Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of Serving Consecutive Notices Of Hearing & The Tribunal Cannot Keep This Appeal Pending For Indefinite Time Due To Non-Representation. Therefore, In The Absence Of Any Authorised Representative Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Decide The Appeal With The Help Of Ld. Dr & Also Considering The Material Available On Record. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In Fish Marketing. The Assessee Deposited A Sum Of

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and

Abhishek Bhutra, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-38, Midnapore, Midnapur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A No.242/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Abhishek Bhutra..….…....………………………… ........................……Appellant C/O S. N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocate 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kol-1. [Pan: Ahupb6924D] Vs. Acit, Circle-38, Midnapore...............…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 23, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 30, 2025 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.02.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Of Rs.32,76,000/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Deposits In Bank Account Of The Assessee Treating The Same As Income Of The Assessee From Undisclosed Sources. The Assessee, An Individual, Was Engaged In Wholesale Dealing In Mobile Handsets Of Different Companies Under The Name & Style Of “Ub Starcom”. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Act On 01.11.2017 Disclosing A Total Income At Rs.15,34,300/- For The Assessment Year Under Dispute. The Notice U/S

Section 120Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay