Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.263

Section 139(1) falls under section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 263 (Return of income) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 263 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 139(1) is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 of the 8,117 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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.

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.

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
263 ITR 706 · 2003 · Supreme Court
691
citing judgments

A citizen is free to carry on business within the law, and mere tax planning without a motive to evade taxes through colorable devices is not frowned upon. The liability to taxation, for the purpose of tax treaty application, is a legal situation, not the fiscal fact of actual payment.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
384 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Co-operative banks are not fundamentally different from co-operative societies, entitling them to claim deductions under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, including for interest income treated as business income.

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court
609
citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

Judgments on Section 139(1)

Young Women'S Christian Association, Kozhencherry vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Thiruvalla

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

ITA 613/COCH/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2020-21 Young Women'S Christian Association .......... Appellant Kozhencherry P.O., Pathanamthitta 689641 [Pan: Aaaay3019Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 2, Thiruvalla Appellant By: Shri Rajakannan, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.01.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 03.05.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Society Registered Under The Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific & Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. It Is Also Duly Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Appellant Filed The Return Of Income For Ay 2020-21 On 31.05.2021 Declaring Income Of Rs. 46,100/-. The Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc Vide Intimation Dated 30.11.2021 At A Total Income Of Rs. 25,48,381/- On The Ground That The Appellant Had Failed To File The 2 Young Women'S Christian Association Return Of Income Within The Due Date Prescribed U/S. 139(1) Of The Act & Also The Prescribed Audit Report In Form 10B.

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 12ASection 139(1)

Akash Jain, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 32(3), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2248/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.2248/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Akash Jain………………………………..……………………….....Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocate Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aoipj6380C] Vs. Ito, Ward-32(3), Kolkata……….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 23, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Care Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Did Not File Any Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2017-18. An Information Was Received That The Assessee Had Deposited An Amount Of Rs.89,50,000/- In His Bank Account During Demonetization Period. Thereafter, The Case Of Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Requesting Thereon To File Return. In Response To Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, The Assessee Submitted Return Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,37,850/-. Subsequently, Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle.1(3), Ahmedabad vs. M/S.Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITSSA 70/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kambleit(Ss)A No. 70/Ahd/2021 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aaryavart Vs. Income-Tax, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1(3), 17-A, First Floor, Pariseema Ahmedabad Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-9 [Pan : Aadca 4844 Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, Ar Respondent By: Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short) Dated 18.03.2021 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee-Company Is Engaged In Executing Government Contracts Obtained From Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd For Construction Of Canals, Laying Of Irrigation Pipelines Within Gujarat State, Building Of Railway Bridges At Chhota-Udaipur, Dabhoi, Gujarat. The Assessee-Company Is Also Engaged In Trading Of Building Materials Like Tmt Bars, Cement, Pipes, Grit-Kapchi Etc & Investment In Immovable Properties. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of It(Ss)A No. 70/Ahd/2021 Acit Vs. Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Asst. Year :– 2017-18 - 2–

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 250

Mustak Rajjak Kapade, Ratnagiri vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ratnagiri

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 889/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.889/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mustak Rajjak Kapade, V The Income Tax Officer, C/O.Bipin Shaha, 1756, Jutica, S Ward-1,Ratnagiri. Teli Ali, Ratnagiri – 415612. Pan: Bpzpk7653G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Anup Bipin Shaha – Ar Shri Akhilesh Srivastava –Addl.Cit(Dr) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 06/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 For Assessment Year 2012-13; Dated 27.02.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Failed To Appreciate The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case By Confirming The Addition Of Rs.4,00,000/- Pertaining To Cash Deposits In The Month Of October, 2011 & Such Addition Made By Ld.Ao Is Merely On Basis Of Guess Work & Surmise. The Ld.Cit(A) & The Ld.Ao Erred In Appreciating The Explanation Furnished By The Assessee In Respect Of Such Cash Deposit & Made An Addition Which Is Against The Provisions & Spirit Of The Act. The Said Addition Be Deleted & The Assessee Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect.

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 250Section 69A