“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)

Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6277/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6357/Del/2013: Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vs Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., C/O. Cairn India Ltd., 3Rd & 4Th Circle-3(2), International Taxation, Floor, Vipul Plaza, Suncity, Sector- New Delhi 54, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccc3279J

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

from FY 2009-10 (AY 2010-11) to FY 2015-06 (AY 2016- 17). 64. While filing the income tax return as per section 139(1) of the Act read with Rule 12 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, since the same had to be filed in the electronic form

DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon vs. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5989/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle, Gurgaon vs. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbon Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5988/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6357/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

Cairn Energy Hydrocarbons Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6346/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 40aSection 57Section 80I

Navodia Times Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 192/Asr/2022 is

ITA 192/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250oSection 36

cess or fee even after the closing of the accounting year but before the date of filing of the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the assessee(s) would be entitled to deduction under section 43-B on actual payment basis and such deduction would

The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. Shri Girishkumar M. Puruswani, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 407/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And

The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. Shri Girishkumar M. Puruswani, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 406/RJT/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And

The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. Shri Girishkumar M. Puruswani, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 405/RJT/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And

Parveen Kumar Kapoor, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 2, Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2656/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Shri Akhilesh Rathi, Indore vs. The Pr CIT -1, Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 114/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg, C.A For Revenue : Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 26A

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH: DB : INDORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. M/S Hi-Tech Sweet Water Technologies(P) Ltd., Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 230/SRT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.230/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Hi-Tech Sweet Water Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Technologies (P.) Ltd., 5Th Room No.505, Floor, Vs. 4, Gopal Nagar, Nandeda Char Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Rasta, Gidc, Bardoli–394601 Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach7432C िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23/12/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 80I

filed alongwith the return of income though the return of income was filed before the due date as per provisions of section 139 (1) of the Act and in the return of income, the deduction under section 80IA of the Act was claimed. We note that assessee-company is engaged ... claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act, even though the return of income was filed beyond the due date as per section 139 (1) of the Act. The Coordinate Bench held that, when the substantial cause of justice is involved, technicality should be ignored. The findings of the Coordinate

Jairam Gulumal Diyalani, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward1(5), Bharuch

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.171/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Jairam Gulumal Diyalani Income Tax Officer, M/S Tulsi Saree, Main Bazar, Ward-1(5), Bharuch Vs. Jambusar, Dist. Bharuch- 392150 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acgpd 8463 L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-D.R सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Vadodara (In Short “Ld. Pcit”] Dated 07.12.2018, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda, Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Holding That The Assessment Order Dated 29-12-2016 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Thereby Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 Of The I T Act. 2.0 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Additions Of Rs.9,00,000/- On Account Of Total Sums Received From Investment Made In Property Situated At Mumbai. 2.1 The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Baroda Ought To Have Appreciated That The Overall Additions On Account Of The Total Amount Received Have Already Been Made In One Year Or The Other & That There Is No Loss Of Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-D.R

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर

Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. ACIT, Centarl Circle-2, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 6/RJT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271BSection 271F

section 153A/153C of the Act. As a matter of fact, time for filing return of income for all assesses is prescribed in section 139(1) which is applicable to all for that particular year, whereas in case of I.T.A Nos. 4, 5 & 6/Rjt/2022 A.Y. 2010-11 to 2012-13 Page

Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. ACIT, CC-2, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 5/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271BSection 271F

Pankaj Chimanlal Lodhiya, Rajkot vs. ACIT, CC-2, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 4/RJT/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271BSection 271F

Tagore Shiksha Samiti, Jhunjhunu vs. ACIT, Circle (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 425/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Shekhawat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT &

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’B’ JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf

Indera Garments Pvt. Ltd, Rourkela vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalure

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 172/CTK/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.171 & 172/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2022 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2018-2019 & 2019 2019 & 2019-2020 Indera Garments Pvt Ltd., Indera Garments Pvt Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Income Tax Dcit, Cpc, Income Tax Main Main Road, Road, Rourkela, Rourkela, Department, Bangalore Department, Bangalore Sundargarh Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaaci 9173 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal,Ar Pawan Kumar Agarwal,Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal,ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH

Indera Garments Pvt. Ltd, Rourkela vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalure

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/CTK/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal,ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Chotti Leasing & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6214/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 250Section 4

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI ANUBHAV