← 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)

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 7756/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 6769/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 6767/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 6744/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 6743/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3627/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3626/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3625/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3624/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3623/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3368/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

Aprameya Engineering Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Ward 1(1)(1), Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 456/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year: 2022-23 Aprameya Engineering Limited The Income Tax Officer 908, 9Th Floor, Vs Ward-1(1)(1) Venus Atlantis Ahmedabad Corporate Park Anandnagar, Prahlad Nagar Ahmedabad – 380 015 (Gujarat) Pan: Aawca 3138 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Add/Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5 Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred As “The Cit(A)”), Dated 23-02-2024, Which Dismissed The Assessee'S Appeal Against The Intimation Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”), Passed By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. The Primary Issue Is The Rejection Of The Assessee'S Claim For Taxation At A Lower Rate Under Section Aprameya Engineering Ltd. Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

order to avail the benefit, such companies are required to exercise the option in prescribed manner on or before due date specified under section 139(1) for furnishing the return of income. As per the rule 21AE of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, such option can be exercised by filing ... unambiguously declared in the tax audit report (Form 3CD) which was filed on 30-9-2022 i.e. before due date specified under section 139(1) of the Act, indicating the assessee's bona fide belief and commitment to the concessional tax regime. Therefore, there is a marked distinction between

Jaymitra Suna, Sambalpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 820/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.820/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh NairFor Respondent: Shri Abdesh Kumar Jha
Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)

deriving income under the head ‘Income from other sources’. No regular return of income for the A.Y. 2014-15 under the provisions of section 139(1) was filed by the assessee. Subsequently, based on the information available on ITBA portal that the assessee purchased immovable property valued at Rs.4

Mahatma Gandhi Charitable Medical Trust, Kolhapur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Kolhapur

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

ITA 819/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.819/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abdesh Kumar Jha
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 68

hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act’). No regular return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 under the provisions of section 139(1) was filed by the appellant trust. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.142(1) calling upon the appellant trust to file the 2 return of income. In response

Chededeepu Srinivas, Hyderabad vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-14(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 209/HYD/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Yeshwanth Reddy, AR appeared for Shri Santi Pavan Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 36Section 37

made within the due date for the filing of the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The learned Authorities below ought to have allowed the amount of ESI & PF being Rs. 44,08,244/-, under section ... payment of ESI and PF was made within the due date specified for filing of the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. It was argued that the authorities below ought to have allowed the amount of ESI & PF being

Ramji Lal, Jhunjhunu vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(5), Jaipur

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

ITA 655/JPR/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Harsh (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh euh"k cksjkM

The Rampur Rural Coop. Bank Ltd., Ludhiana vs. Pr. CIT-1, Ludhiana

ITA 433/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P

Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is a cooperative society and it filed its return of income under section 139(1) declaring income of Rs 1,22,980/- after claiming deduction under Section 80P amounting to Rs. 71,91,654/-. The case of the assessee

Vicky Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 428/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, C.I.T DR
Section 132(4)

assessee has also shown the closing inventory at ₹ 5,67,62,457.00. Likewise, the assessee has filed the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act declaring an income of Rs. 8,33,83,875.00 before adjusting the set of the brought forward losses. Even assuming but without

Vicky Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 427/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, C.I.T DR
Section 132(4)

assessee has also shown the closing inventory at ₹ 5,67,62,457.00. Likewise, the assessee has filed the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act declaring an income of Rs. 8,33,83,875.00 before adjusting the set of the brought forward losses. Even assuming but without

Vicky Rajesh Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, C.I.T DR
Section 132(4)

assessee has also shown the closing inventory at ₹ 5,67,62,457.00. Likewise, the assessee has filed the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act declaring an income of Rs. 8,33,83,875.00 before adjusting the set of the brought forward losses. Even assuming but without