← 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)

Suyash Solutions Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-5, Pune

Accordingly, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 576/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.576/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Suyash Solutions Pvt. Ltd., V The Dy.Cit, S.No.145, Pune Saswad Road, S. Circle-5, Pune. Opp,.Navalakha Godown, Phursungi, Pune – 412308. Maharashtra. Pan: Aajcs7144M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mihir C Naniwadekar & Shri B.D.Bhide – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastva– Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2010-11, Dated 22.01.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(1) Of The I.T.Act, Dated 23.02.2011. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”बी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Smartenviro Systems Private Limited, Pune vs. I.T.O, Pune

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

ITA 1144/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Saraswaty Press Limited, Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1467/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2021-22 Saraswaty Press Ltd..…….. ……………………………….……….……Appellant 11, B. T. Road, Belgharia, Kol - 700056. [Pan: Aaecs6328J] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rip Das, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 12, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

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

Rahee Steel Tech Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 1, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1418/KOL/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: The Assessing Officer On 10.1.2024, Therefore, The Action Of Ao (Cpc) Is Not Correct & Cannot Be Sustained & So Also The Order Of The Ld Cit(A). The Above View Finds Support From The Decision Of Hon’Ble Gujarat High Court In The Case Of Royal Led Equipment (P) Ltd Vs Ccit (2025) 174 Taxmann.Com 61 (Gujarat), Wherein, The Hon’Ble High Court Has Held As Under:

Section 10BSection 11Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

case of Wipro Limited (Supra), the petitioner is not entitled to file Form 10IC belatedly after the filing of the return under Section 139(1) of the Act is concerned, the said aspect is taken into consideration by this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax versus Gujarat Energy ... significance of filing a declaration under section 10B (8) can be said to be co- terminus with filing of a return under section 139(1), as a check has been put in place by virtue of section 10B (5) to verify the correctness of claim of deduction at the time

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

ITA 6216/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

ITA 6215/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

ITA 6214/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

ITA 6160/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6159/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

Dheeraj Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

ITA 6158/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh(), Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 11Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 274

r.w.s 271 of the Act was issued and the assessee ultimately filed a letter dated 22.08.2016 stating that the return filed under Section 139(1) of the Act be treated as return filed in response to the notice under Section 153A of the Act. Such re-assessment proceeding was finally

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Nuwave E Solutions (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3676/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Acit, Vs M/S. Nuwave E Solutions (P) Circle-13(1), Ltd., 3Rd Floor, District Centre, New Delhi Dda Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Pan-Aabcn5790Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pravin Rawal, Cit Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gutpa, Adv., Shri Saksham Agarwal, Ca, Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 15.03.2011 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-Xvi, New Delhi [“Cit(A)”, In Short] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2010 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Company & E- Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.08.2007, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 1,45,48,453/-. The Said Return Was Revised On 20.08.2008, Declaring The Same Income As Was Declared The Return Of Income Filed U/S 139(1). The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Various Queries Were Raised Which Were Replied By The Assessee. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Development & Export Of Software & 100% Eou Registered With Director Software Technology Park Of India In Terms Of Registration Certificate Dated 31.03.1999. The Major Shareholder In The Assessee Company Is Shri Anil Gutpa Who Is Having 99% Shareholding & Is Taking Substantial Interest In Day-To-Day Affairs Of The Assessee & Also In Its Associate Enterprises (“Ae”) At Us Who Is The Sole Buyer Of The Software Developed By The Assessee.

Section 10Section 10ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 801A

ITA No.3676/Del/2011 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI

Sh. Manoj Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 642/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOONTANAT M EMEBER, DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMEBER

For Appellant: SHRI P.C. PARWAL, C.AFor Respondent: SHRI RAJESH OJHA, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A” JAIPUR BEFORE: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOONTANAT M EMEBER AND DR

Mall of Jaipur Owners Welfare Association, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 333/JPR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Mittal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

profit entity established solely for ensuring maintenance and upkeep of the Mall of Jaipur. The assessee filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act on 31.07.2024, declaring total income of Rs. 22,12,550, comprising solely of interest income earned from fixed deposits. Assessee

Lalji Yadav, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer- 6(2), Lucknow

ITA 804/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Income Tax Officer-6(2)
Section 143(3)Section 253(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Shashi Infra Construction Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. ITO, Lucknow

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

ITA 353/LKW/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shashi Infra V. The Constructions Pvt Ltd Addl/Joint/Deputy/Asstt/Income 328B, 5Th Lane Rajendra Tax Officer, Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226004. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Tan/Pan:Aaucs5802M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 253(3)Section 694ASection 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Shri Martand Deosansthan Jejuri, Pune vs. ITO Exemption Ward 1(2), Pune

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

ITA 593/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sachin KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(9)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

also the provisos of section 13(9) of the Act which mandates filing of Form 10 on or before due date specified under section 139(1) for furnishing return of income. Thus, vide show cause notice dated 29.11.2019, the assessee was asked to explain why its accumulation of Rs.80 ... date mentioned in Section 44AB of the Act, which is one month before the due date for submitting the Income Tax Return under Section 139(1) of the Act. 7.4 In the present case, the appellant submitted Form 10B on April 05, 2018, while the deadline for filing Form

M/S. Ebek Language Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Trichy vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Trichy

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1508/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1507 & 1508/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2022-23 & 2023-24 M/S. Ebek Language Dcit Laboratories Pvt Ltd., Vs. Circle 1(1), No. 6A, 4Th Floor, Gvr Complex, Trichy. Lawsons Road, Trichy – 620 001. [Pan: Aabce-7268-C] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Arv. Sreenivasan. Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV. Sreenivasan. CIT
Section 115BSection 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष

M/S. Ebek Language Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Trichy vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Trichy

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1507/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1507 & 1508/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2022-23 & 2023-24 M/S. Ebek Language Dcit Laboratories Pvt Ltd., Vs. Circle 1(1), No. 6A, 4Th Floor, Gvr Complex, Trichy. Lawsons Road, Trichy – 620 001. [Pan: Aabce-7268-C] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Arv. Sreenivasan. Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV. Sreenivasan. CIT
Section 115BSection 143(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष

Dhritiman Roy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 542/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250Section 90

have specifically provided that the FTC would be disallowed if the assessee does not file Form 67 within the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that that there are many sections in the Act which specifically deny deduction or exemption or relief

Muniyappa Muniraju, Bengaluru vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-2, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1119/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Muniyappa Muniraju, Vs. Pr. Cit, No.1/3, 1St Cross, Muni Narasimhaiah Bangalore - 2. Garden, Chocolate Factory Main Road, Btm I Stage, Bangalore – 560 029, Karnataka. Pan : Anjpm 0458 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194HSection 263Section 44A

facts of the case are that assessee did not file return of income for the impugned Assessment Year as per provision of section 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the case was reopened following due procedure as per sections 147/148 of the Act and accordingly notice under section