← 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)

Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees Coop Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Thiruvallur vs. ITO, Ncw-7(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3577/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3576 & 3577/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Heavy Vehicle Factory Employees Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Ltd., M B 26-A, Hvf Estate, Avadi, Chennai. Tiruvallur 600 054. [Pan:Aaaah3020N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sbr Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Order Dated 09.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Filed Any Adjournment Petition. Thus, The 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri SBR Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 80ASection 80P

outset, it is noted that the assessee had not filed its return of income within the time provided under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and the assessee also failed to file return of income even in response to the notice issued ... deduction under section 80P of the Act is allowable only if the return of income is filed within the time provided in section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer denied the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed

Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees Coop Thrift and Credit Society Ltd., Tiruvallur vs. ITO, Ncw-7(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3576/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3576 & 3577/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Heavy Vehicle Factory Employees Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Ltd., M B 26-A, Hvf Estate, Avadi, Chennai. Tiruvallur 600 054. [Pan:Aaaah3020N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sbr Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Order Dated 09.09.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Nor Filed Any Adjournment Petition. Thus, The 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri SBR Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 80ASection 80P

outset, it is noted that the assessee had not filed its return of income within the time provided under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and the assessee also failed to file return of income even in response to the notice issued ... deduction under section 80P of the Act is allowable only if the return of income is filed within the time provided in section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer denied the claim of deduction under section 80P of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed