← 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)

Krypton Distributors LLP (Earlier Known As Krypton Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1733/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Krypton Distributors Llp (Earlier Known As Krypton Ito, Ward 12(1), Distributors P. Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Flat No.1A, 1, Abdul Rasul Chowringhee Square, Vs. Avenue, Kalighat, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700026, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck5298G Assessee By : Shri Manoj Katuruka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Katuruka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

Joygopalpur Youth Development Centre, Sandeshkhali vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(Exemptions), Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1378/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

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

P.N. Pandian, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1145/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1143 To 1145/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 P. N. Pandian, Acit, No.11/1, Mosque Colony, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), 13Th Street, Maduvankarai, Chennai. Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Ahppp-9266-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (&'थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate &'थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am : The Present Appeals Are Filed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai, (In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 & 2017-18 Both Dated 04.03.2021 & 2018-19 Dated 14.12.2020. Since Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri. N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 153ASection 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी टी वक", "ाियक

P.N. Pandian, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1144/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1143 To 1145/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 P. N. Pandian, Acit, No.11/1, Mosque Colony, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), 13Th Street, Maduvankarai, Chennai. Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Ahppp-9266-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (&'थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate &'थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am : The Present Appeals Are Filed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai, (In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 & 2017-18 Both Dated 04.03.2021 & 2018-19 Dated 14.12.2020. Since Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri. N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 153ASection 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी टी वक", "ाियक

P.N. Pandian, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1143/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1143 To 1145/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 P. N. Pandian, Acit, No.11/1, Mosque Colony, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), 13Th Street, Maduvankarai, Chennai. Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Ahppp-9266-M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (&'थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N.Arjun Raj, Advocate &'थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.R.Raghunatha, Am : The Present Appeals Are Filed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai, (In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 & 2017-18 Both Dated 04.03.2021 & 2018-19 Dated 14.12.2020. Since Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri. N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 153ASection 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एबी टी वक", "ाियक

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1906/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT -Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1905/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1904/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1903/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1902/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1901/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Trig Detectives Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 1900/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 37(1)Section 40

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Fluor Daniel India Private Limited, India vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(1), Cr Building, Ip Estate, New Delhi, India

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3481/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234C

learned lower authorities alleging belated credit thereof in the prescribed account after the “due” date in the prescribed statute than that of filing section 139(1) return. We further wish to clarify here that the “due” date for the purpose of foregoing compliance of ESI/PF payment in the assessee

Govabhai Lakhabhai Rabari, Anjar vs. Income Tax Officer(ITO), Gandhidham

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

ITA 878/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalepesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 274Section 44A

return for the AY 2017-18 as my total income for the said assessment year is below exemption limit and as per section 139(1) if the total income is less than the exemption limit then it is not necessary to file the Income-tax return. During the year under

Govabhai Lakhabhai Rabari, Anjar vs. Income Tax Officer(ITO), Gandhidham

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

ITA 877/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kalepesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 274Section 44A

return for the AY 2017-18 as my total income for the said assessment year is below exemption limit and as per section 139(1) if the total income is less than the exemption limit then it is not necessary to file the Income-tax return. During the year under

Nabarun S K U S Ltd., Nadia vs. I.T.O.Ward-41(1), Krishnanagar

ITA 89/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 119Section 139Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Bhuban Mondal, Murshidabad vs. ITO, Ward 42(2), Murshidabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2138/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Khadakala Seva Sahkari Manadli Ltd., Rajkot (Amreli) vs. The ITO Ward - 3 (1) (4) Amreli, Amreli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 199/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.199/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2018-19 Khadakala Seva Sahkari Mandali Income Tax Officer Ltd. Ward 3(1)(4), Amreli बनाम/ Savarkundla, Amreli, 364515 Gujarat - 365650 Vs [C/O. D. R. Adhia Om Shri Padamlaya, Near Trikamrayji Haweli, 16- Jagnath Plot, Dr. Yagnik Road, Opp. Imperial Hotel, Rajkot, Gujarat 360001] "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabak3647B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Written Submission राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M:

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 80P

subsequent amendments to section 80AC ......, it make the claim for deduction under section 80P conditional on filing a return with due date under section 139(1) of the IT Act...... conditions for claiming deduction under section 80P of the I T act has been made more stringent by reducing

Bhupatbhai Dhanjibhai Kothari, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 578/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Am Arate Sitet F/Ita No.578/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing)

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM & BEFORE SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM arate sitet

Eloor Vanitha Kshemodharana Co-Operative Society Ltd., Udyogamandal vs. ITO Ward -1 &Tps, Aluva

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

ITA 848/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 Eloor Vanitha Kshemodharana Co-Op Society Ltd. ......... Appellant Fact Dormetry Room No. 27, Kochi 683501 [Pan: Aaaae8921H] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wd-1 & Tds, Aluva .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri K.K. Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Neethu S. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 11.09.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. No Return Of Income For Ay 2019-20 Was Filed By The Appellant Society Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act Was Issued To The Appellant On 30.03.2023. In Response To The Notice U/S. 148 The Appellant Filed Return Of Income On 06.06.2023 Declaring

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neethu S. Sr. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 80P

operative Societies Act, 1969. No return of income for AY 2019-20 was filed by the appellant society under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant on 30.03.2023. In response