← All Phrases

“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)

Krishan Kumar Yadav, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rewari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8417/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8417/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Krishan Kumar Yadav, Vs Income Tax Officer, Bank Of Baroda, Circular Road, Ward-2, Rewari, Haryana-123401 Rewari, Haryana-123401 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpy1644F Assessee By: Sh. I. P. Bansal, Adv. & Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2020-21 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1081822094(1) Dated 16.10.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. I. P. Bansal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

individual. He filed his return for AY 2018-19 on 29.08.2018 declaring income of Rs. 6,35,470/-. His return was processed under section 143(1)(a) on 28.06.2019. His case was selected for complete scrutiny assessment under the e-assessment Scheme, 2019 on two issues, namely refund claim ... income from other sources and claimed deduction for 50% as per section 57(iv) of the 1961 Act. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. An application under section 264 was made claiming that by mistake the assessee treated the interest income as income from other

Kapila Mahendra Patel, Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1905/AHD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2024-25 Kapila Mahendra Patel Vs. The Dy.Cit Circle-1(1)(1) Kamdhenu Estate Aayakar Bhavan Opp. Citi Bank Race Course Race Course Circle Vadodara – 390 007 Vadodara – 390 007 Pan : Adbpp 3883 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 24Section 250

facts in not appreciating the fact that the adjustment made by Ld. A.O., CPC, Bengaluru does not fall within the permissible scope of section 143(1)(a), which allows Kapila Mahendra Patel vs. Dy.CIT Asst. Year : 2024-25 2 adjustments only for apparent arithmetical errors, incorrect claims, or clear mismatches ... Year 2024–25 on 21.07.2024 declaring a total income of Rs.1,70,94,750/-. The Centralised Processing Centre, Bengaluru processed the return under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and issued intimation dated 18.06.2025 to the assessee. In the said intimation, CPC computed the total

Incometax Officer Exemptions Ward, Tirunelveli vs. The Christian Businessmen Educational Fellowship, Kovilpatti

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

ITA 2395/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2395/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer, The Christian Businessmen Exemptions Ward Vs. Educational Fellowship, Nellai City Centre, Rahmath Nagar, No.46, Alwar Street, Tiruchendur Road, Kovilpatti, Tirunelvali, Tamil Nadu-628501 Tamil Nadu-627011 [Pan: Aacat2359N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.C.Sivakumar, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.R. Viswanthan, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026

For Appellant: Mr.C.Sivakumar, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Mr.R. Viswanthan, CA
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80G

income, having applied its income towards charitable purposes in accordance with section 11 of the Act. The return was processed by CPC under section 143(1), wherein the revenue expenditure amounting to Rs.5,10,46,521/- was disallowed on the alleged ground of inconsistency between Schedule TI and Schedule ... were also rejected by CPC by reiterating the same adjustment. 3. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the adjustment made under section 143(1) was beyond jurisdiction, deleted the disallowance and quashed the consequential demand. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal