Section 119 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.239

Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 239 (Instructions to subordinate authorities) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 239 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 119 is PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (163 Taxmann.com 9), cited in 597 of the 707 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 119

PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar
163 Taxmann.com 9 · 2024 · High Court
597
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D for search assessments is invalid if granted mechanically, hastily, or without due application of mind, such as on the same day as the proposal or in a bunched manner. Such an invalid approval renders the consequential assessment order under Section 153A void ab initio.

PCIT v. Sapna Gupta
147 Taxmann.com 288 · 2023 · High Court
591
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D for search assessments is not a mere formality; it requires the approving authority to apply its mind judiciously to the subject matter and ensure satisfaction of legal and procedural requirements for each assessment year.

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
454 ITR 312 · 2023 · High Court
580
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act is mandatory for assessment orders in search cases. While elaborate reasons for approval are not required, the approving authority must provide some indication that it has examined the draft orders and found them to meet the requirements of law.

Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
267 ITR 272 · 2004 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

CBDT and CBEC circulars, along with administrative instructions, are binding on departmental authorities, who must not act in contravention of them. However, these circulars and instructions are not binding on courts or assessees.

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
163 Taxmann.com 118 · 2024 · Supreme Court
500
citing judgments

Strict adherence to approval protocols under Section 153D, including those in the Departmental Manual of Office Procedure, is essential for search assessments. An assessment is invalid if the approving authority fails to apply its mind or consider all relevant seized material before granting approval.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

ACIT v. Sirajuddin& Co.
150 Taxmann.com 146 · 2023 · High Court
288
citing judgments

Assessment orders are bad in law if they are passed without valid approval from the Additional Commissioner under Section 153D, or if such approval is granted mechanically without application of mind.

PCIT v. Anuj Bansal
165 Taxmann.com 2 · 2024 · High Court
181
citing judgments

An approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is considered mechanical and invalid if granted without application of mind and without perusing relevant assessment records, including seized material. This principle has been affirmed by multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court.

Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. v. CIT
253 ITR 749 · 2002 · High Court
181
citing judgments

For a limited company, expenses cannot be disallowed merely on the grounds of presumed personal use of assets by directors or by treating the expenditure as a non-business purpose. Percentage disallowances of expenses in such cases are not sustainable.

CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd.
61 Taxmann.com 45 · 2015 · High Court
177
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) cannot be made when the assessee has deducted tax at a lesser rate, as opposed to no deduction. The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is applicable retrospectively, mitigating disallowance where tax is deposited by the recipient.

Judgments on Section 119

Lakshachandi Apartment Abcd Co Operative Housing Society, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41 (4)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3190/MUM/2026[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2023-24 Lakshachandi Apartment Income Tax Officer, Abcd Co Operative Housing Ward 41 (4)(2), Society, 854 B, Kautilya Bhavan, Cts No. 156 A 9 C1 243, Vs. C41-43, Avenue 3, G Block Lakshachandi Apartments Abcd Bkc, Bandra Kurla Chs, Film City Road, Goregaon, Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400063. Mumbai, Maharashtra - Pan – Aaaal2732P 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Rashmikant Modi Revenue By : Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.07.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.02.2026, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Lucknow (In Short, “Ld. Commissioner”), U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”), For The A.Y. 2023-24. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessee’S Claim For Deduction Of Rs.9,07,260/- U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Act Has Been Denied By The Ao & The Ld. Commissioner, On Account Of A Delay Of Just One Day, In Filing The Return Of Income. 2 Lakshachandi Apartment Abcd Co Operative Housing Society 3. We Observe From The Impugned Order That The Ld. Commissioner Refers To Cbdt Circular No. 14/2024 Dated 30.10.2024, Whereby The Applicability Of Cbdt Circular No. 13/2023 Dated 26.07.2023 Has Been Extended To The A.Y. 2023-24 & Holds That, In View Of The Provisions Of Section 119(2)(B) Of The Act, The Appellate Authority Does Not Have The Power To Condone The Delay In Filing The Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Ms. Rashmikant ModiFor Respondent: Ms. Jayshree Thakur, SR. D.R
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)