“Section 143(1)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)2,323 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(1)(a) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)(a)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji

167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court

3,926

citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla

380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court

3,235

citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT

243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court

2,943

citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

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.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.

38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT

2,267

citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.

322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court

2,228

citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court

2,118

citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT

223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court

2,040

citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Judgments citing Section 143(1)(a)

Anil Kumar Parekh, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Dhamtari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 194/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.194/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anil Kumar Parekh C/O. Madhu Traders, Station Road, Dhamtari (C.G.)-493 773 Pan: Akepp0240E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Application)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

following the procedure like issue of notice under section 143(2)/142. This does not pro-vide accepting the return as provided under section 143(1)(a) : the officer has to complete the assessment under section 143(3) only. If an assessment is to be completed under section 143

Govardhan Deepchand Bhambhani, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 289/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Who Confirmed The Addition By Observing As Follows:

Section 10Section 143(1)

against appellate order dated 09.12.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Delhi arising out of the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21. I.T.A No. 289/Ahd/2025

Pratim Chakraborty, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 43(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 437/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 90

India-USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement ('DTAA') read with CBDT circular 333 dated 02 April 1982, in the Intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act ('Act') on the premise that Form 67 in support of FTC was filed beyond the due date of filing of the Return of Income ... ADDL/JCIT(A) ought to have held that the non-grant of FTC of Rs. 3,52,291 is not a permissible adjustment under Section 143(1) of the Act as no such adjustment relating to debatable issues can be made in the Intimation under Section 143(1

M/S. Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-30(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 126/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 126/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 M/S. Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Ltd,…Appellant 15, India Exchange Place, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Abjfm7166M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………..…………..Respondent Ward-30(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700031 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: May 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)

order of ld. CPC when the asessee was not allowed any proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard by issuing prior intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Act before making the impugned adjustments under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the adjustments are liable ... been issued u/s 143(1) of the Act. Issuance of a show cause notice is a condition precedent as per the provision of section 143(1) of the Act. On account of the failure to issue the show cause notice as also on account of the fact that the status

The Rotary Charitable Trust Malavalli, Mandya vs. ITO, Exemptions, Ward-1, Mysore

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

ITA 133/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 The Rotary Charitable Trust Malavalli Thyagaraj Road Kotemalvalli Malavalli Ito Vs. Mandya 571 430 Exemption Ward Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Aactt2807N Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Tharun Kothari, A.R. Respondent By : Sri Subramanian, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A) Kochi Dated 20.01.2025 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1072336484(1) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Rotary Charitable Trust, Malavalli Page 2 Of 11 The Rotary Charitable Trust, Malavalli Page 3 Of 11

For Appellant: Sri Tharun Kothari, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian, D.R

Section 10Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

assessee vehemently submitted that the intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act is illegal & bad in law especially when 2nd Proviso to Section 143(1)(a) mandates 30 days time whereas in the present case the Intimation has been passed by providing just 2 days time which is gross ... assessee which is a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. It has been mandated under the 1st Proviso to section 143(1)(a) of the Act that no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustments either in writing

Portescap India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 6749/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 92C(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (ACCOUNTANT

Incometax Officer, Bhimavaram vs. Prasad Raju Penmatsa, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 33/VIZ/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.517/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Penmatsa Prasad Raju D.No. 7-7-25/3 Income Tax Office Kodavalli Road, Fci Colony Aayakar Bhavan Bhimavaram – 534201 Jp Road, Sivaraopet Andhra Pradesh Bhimavaram – 534201 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aqcpp6707B] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.33/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23) Vs. Penmatsa Prasad Raju Income Tax Officer D.No. 7-7-25/3 Income Tax Office Kodavalli Road, Fci Colony Aayakar Bhavan Bhimavaram – 534201 Opp. Ganesh Canteen Andhra Pradesh Jp Road, Sivaraopet Bhimavaram – 534202 [Pan:Aqcpp6707B] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 144

income for the A.Y. 2022-23 on 28.10.2022 admitting a total income of Rs.14,72,050/-. The return was summarily processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued

Penmatsa Prasad Raju, Bhimavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 517/VIZ/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 144

Semantic Square LLP, Ameenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sangareddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 719/HYD/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

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

Credit [in short “FTC”] of Rs.1,91,137/-. The return of income filed by the assessee has been processed and intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been issued on 06.04.2021 and the Assessing Officer-CPC has denied the claim of credit ... date provided under section 139(1) of the Act. The return of income filed by the assessee has been processed under section 143(1) of the Act 8 ITA.Nos.717, 718 and 719/Hyd./2025 on 06.04.2021 and the Assessing Officer-CPC denied the credit of FTC on the ground that

Semantic Square LLP, Ameenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sangareddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 718/HYD/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

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

Semantic Square LLP, Ammenpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-(1), Sanga Reddy

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 717/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri CA, Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: MS. G Saratha, Sr. AR And Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR

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

M/S. Bata India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1073/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115PSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 250

have considered the submissions made. It is to be examined whether the appeal against the intimation under section 143(1) was separately maintainable or not before the Ld. CIT(A) and whether the intimation under section 143(1) had merged in the order under section 143 ... render the appeal against the intimation under section 143(1) as not maintainable. On similar facts, the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of MSTC Ltd. vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Circle 1(1), Kolkata in ITA No. 623/KOL/2024 order dated 01.10.2024 has discussed and decided this issue

Greenovoc Specialty Coatings Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3284/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 115BSection 143(1)

learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the learned CPC/AO to delete the additional tax demand as the same is not permissible under Section 143(1) of the Income tax Act and such adjustment cannot be made without issuing intimation to the assessee. The learned CIT(A) erred ... appreciating that the adjustment on the claim, which requires further enquiry, cannot be made as prima facie adjustment under Section 143(1) of the Income tax Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the CPC/AO to delete interest under Sections 234B and 234C of the Income

M/S. Laxmi Organic Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4782/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate andFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 80I

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

Sanmoy Ray, Hooghly vs. Income Tax Officer 24(2), Hoohghly

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 683/KOL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Us, The Ld. Ar Argued That The Filing Of Form 67 Within The Stipulated Time Was A Directory Provision & Not Mandatory. It Was Averred That The Us-India Dtaa Would Come To The Rescue Of The Assessee In This Regard.

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

subsequent to the passing of assessment order. W P. No 5834 of 2022. 12 Further, in the present case, the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 26.03.2021, but the FTC was filed on 7 Sanmoy Ray 02.02.2021. Thus, the respondent is supposed to have provided the due credit

Shree Piyushpani Sthapatya Sangrahalay Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal of

ITA 3428/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(8)Section 143(1)(a)Section 254(1)

Grounds 3 and 4), being factual and debatable, without verification of facts, could not have been made while processing the return under section 143(1)(a). 6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC failed to appreciate that the assessee had relied on the binding judgment of the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai

Shree Piyushpani Sthapatya Sangrahalay Trust, Mumbai vs. Dy Director ITO Exemption Ward 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal of

ITA 3427/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(8)Section 143(1)(a)Section 254(1)

Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Ajmer

ITA 1296/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal, Feeling Dissatisfied With The Order Dated 26.08.2024, Passed By Learned Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, As Thereby Its Appeal Filed Against Assessment Order Dated 25.01.2024 , Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), Has Been Dismissed & The Assessment Order Has Been Confirmed.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhelesh Kataria, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)(a)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 3

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks

Navrang Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd., Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Jalgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 1460/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawadiaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

Counsel for the assessee wherein it has been held that prior to amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 in clause (v) of section 143(1)(a) of the Act, CPC had no powers u/s.143(1)(a)(v) of the act to deny the deduction ... present Case of the assessee though admittedly return was filed beyond the time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act but still section 143(1)(a)(v) is not applicable to the Panchashil Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd. Navrang Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd. assessee since the case of the assessee

Panchashil Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd., Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Jalgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 1459/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawadiaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P