“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)

Shri Poornima Entertainments LLP, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 835/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Poornima Entertainments Llp, Flat No. A-304, Sdc Gateway, Plot No. B-1-2, Ghiya Marg Bani Park, Jaipur 302 016 Pan No.: Aeafs 8967C ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Mr. Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Ojha, CIT, Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 3Section 80Section 80I

certificate was granted to the Assessee Appellant on 31.03.2022. 3. Assessee Appellant, for the year under consideration, filed its Return of Income under section 139(1) of the Act, on 31.10.2023, at a total income of Rs. Nil, claiming deduction under section 80IAC

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Gvk Jaipur Expressway Pvt Ltd, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the years [A

ITA 307/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us. Moreover, The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objections In Both The

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

therefore an admitted fact that the entire amount was deposited by the assessee before the due date of filing of the return under section 139(1) of the Act, then in such a scenario, the amount cannot be disallowed under section 36(1

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Gvk Jaipur Expressway Pvt Ltd, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the years [A

ITA 306/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us. Moreover, The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objections In Both The

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S Pramod Telecom Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, Lucknow

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 243/LKW/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

been deposited in the designated account of employees before the due date of the filing of the income tax return as provided under section 139(1), in view of the provisions of section 43B of the Income Tax Act. However, the assessee did not receive a response to the application

M/S Pramod Telecom Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow vs. DCIT/ACIT-3, Lucknow

In the result, in ITA. No

ITA 242/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Akshat Education and Charitable Trust, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward- Exemption, Vadodara

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

ITA 457/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.457/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-2021 Akshat Education & Charitable The Income Tax Officer, Trust, बनाम Ward (Exemption), / 5/35, Gosainu Faliyu, Vadodara. V/S. Asodar Borsad Road, Asodar, Anand-388307. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaeta2211K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Coimbatore [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 25.01.2025, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] For The Assessment Year 2020–21. The Impugned Order Arises Out Of The Akshat Education & Charitable Trust Vs. Ito(E) Assessment Year 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

assessee uploaded audit report in Form 10B, which was also dated 31.03.2021. The due date for filing the return and audit report under section 139(1) stood extended to 15.02.2021, and hence both filings were beyond the statutory due date. 3. The CPC, Bengaluru processed the return under section ... audit report in Form 10B was also filed on 31.03.2021. Both filings were admittedly beyond the extended due date of 15.02.2021 under section 139(1). The CPC, while processing the return under section 143(1), denied exemption under section 11 and taxed the entire gross receipts of Rs. 1

Gujarat Technological University, Ahmedabad, Vadodara vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 Exemptions, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

with effect from 01.04.2010 vide order dated 17.06.2010. 3. For the relevant previous year, the assessee filed its return of income under section 139(1) on 23.10.2019, accompanied by a provisional audit report in Form No. 10B. The return disclosed total receipts of Rs. 1

Brahmos Realty Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 9(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4119/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4119/Mum/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2024-25 Brahmos Realty Private Limited A-10002, Aristo Sappyhire, 2Nd Floor, Hasnabad Lane, Santakruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 (M.H) Pan: Aadcr5685C ...........अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2)(1),Mumbai (M.H.) .......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By Revenue By : Shri B.N Rao : Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :13.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2025 2 Brahmos Realty Private Limited Vs. Ito, Ward-9(2)(1)

For Respondent: Shri B.N Rao

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण न्यायपीठ मुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “J(SMC)" BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

Ecossential Clothing Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3720/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, AM

Akola Trading Company LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2448/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, AM ITA

Akola Trading Company LLP (Successor of Akola Trading Company Pvt Ltd), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2293/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, AM ITA

Saroj Rani, Uttar Pradesh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 44(6), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5472/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 54

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN

Muslim Education Institute Trust, Namlabal vs. Income Tax Officer Awrd- ( Exemptions), Jammu

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 473/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.Q. Wani (CA) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan (CIT) – Ld. DR

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 154

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Navanirman Multipurpose Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Belagavi

ITA 116/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 116/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Navanirman Multipurpose Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Laxmi Nagar, Hindalaga, Dist. Belagavi.-591108 Pan : Aacan0420G . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Belagavi. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; By Captioned Appeal The Assessee Impugns Din & Order 1074658686(1) Dt. 18/03/2025 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac/Cit(A)’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 15/02/2024 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act By National Faceless E- Asstt Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80A(5)Section 80P(2)

been denied for the reason that assessee has not filed the return of income within the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. The issue is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana ... were made by the assessee in a return of income filed by him. That return can be under sections 139(1), 139(4), 142(1) or section 148, and to be valid, had to be filed within the due date contemplated under those provisions. Under section 80A(5), the claim

The Katohar Khurd Co-Op Agriculture Service Scoiety Limited, Amb vs. Income Tax Officer, Una

ITA 197/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Poplani (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar (CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 69ASection 80ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND

Sarvajanik Kelavni Mandal, Surat vs. The DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru Juris.AO the Dy.CIT, Circle-2, Exemption Ward, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 491/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.491/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Sarvajanik Kelavani Mandal The Ddit, Cpc, Bengaluru बनाम/ Amroli Station Utran Juris.Ao The Dy.Cit, V/S. Choryasi Circle-2, Exemption Ward Surat – 394 107 Ahmedabad – 380 015 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabts 4579 B (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 44A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “ए“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7 Pune, Pune vs. Kumar Housing Corporation Private Limited, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 341/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 32Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Pashankar Auto Wheels Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. CIT(A) Circle-4, Pune

ITA 1546/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: S/Shri Bheek Singh Rajpurohit and Abhijeet JainFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl.CIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 194Section 194ISection 24

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA

Kumar Urban Development Pvt. Ltd (Successor Kumar Housing Corpn. Pvt Ltd), Pune vs. DCIT Circle 14, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2875/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 32Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Kumar Urban Development Pvt. Ltd (Successor Kumar Housing Corporation Pvt Ltd), Pune vs. DCIT Circle 14, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the

ITA 2874/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 32Section 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA