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)

Madhyam, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- Exemp 1(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1456/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

Kanichukulangara Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Kanichukulangara vs. Income Tax Officer, Alappuzha

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

ITA 594/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bijumon Antony, C.AFor Respondent: ShriLeena Lal, (SR.AR.)
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 144oSection 250Section 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(2)Section 270A(3)Section 270A(6)(a)Section 80

Ujjal Sinha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1935/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1931, 1932, 1934 & 1935/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ujjal Sinha……………….……..……………………….……….……….……Appellant 57/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge S.O, Kol- 700019.. [Pan: Aeips4499F] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata….……..……………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 13, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.08.25, 05.08.25, 04.08.25 & 04.08.25 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Confirming Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Levied By The Assessing Officer. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Ujjal Sinha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1934/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1931, 1932, 1934 & 1935/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ujjal Sinha……………….……..……………………….……….……….……Appellant 57/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge S.O, Kol- 700019.. [Pan: Aeips4499F] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata….……..……………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 13, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.08.25, 05.08.25, 04.08.25 & 04.08.25 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Confirming Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Levied By The Assessing Officer. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Ujjal Sinha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1933/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2011-12 Ujjal Sinha……..…………………..………………….……….……….……Appellant 57/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge S.O, Kolkata 19. [Pan: Aeips4499F] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata……………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 13, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.08.2025 Of The Cit (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011–12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Filed His Return Of Income U/S.139(1) Of The Act For The A.Y. 2011-12 On 11/02/2012 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.19,12,432/-. In The Instant Case, A Search & Seizure Operation Was Conducted On 24.01.2012 In The Residential Premises Of The Assessee Wherein No Incriminating Material Was Found. Thereafter. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 153A/143(3) Of The Act On 31/03/2014 Assessing The Total Income At Rs.92,12,430/- Wherein The Following Two Additions To The Total Income Were Made:

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Ujjal Sinha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1932/KOL/2025[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1931, 1932, 1934 & 1935/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2012-13 & 2012-13 Ujjal Sinha……………….……..……………………….……….……….……Appellant 57/3, Ballygunge Circular Road, Ballygunge S.O, Kol- 700019.. [Pan: Aeips4499F] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata….……..……………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 13, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.08.25, 05.08.25, 04.08.25 & 04.08.25 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Confirming Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Levied By The Assessing Officer. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Ujjal Sinha, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1931/KOL/2025[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Sapana Shrinivas Samal, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 42(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 4798/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankar: A.Y : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

Creative Realmart Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(5), Jaipur

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

ITA 457/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Filing Of Appeal In Form-35 & Appellant Has Not Done Any Non-Compliance As Per Section 249(4)(B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Kedawat, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 249(4)(a)Section 249(4)(b)

Bala Devi, Jaipur Rural vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 1306/JPR/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1306/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2013-14 Smt. Bala Devi Dhani :Kankaraiwali, Saravatpura Gram: Amer, Via: Kalwad, Tehsil: Amer Jaipur 303 706 (Raj) Vs. बनाम The ITO Ward 7(4) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: CPCPD 3195 L अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shyam Sunder Jangid, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे/Revenue by: Mrs. Harshi

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sunder Jangid, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Harshita Choudhary, Addl.CIT (DR)
Section 148

Laxminarayan Ramswarup Maniyar, Jalgaon vs. Circle-1, Jalgaon

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

ITA 1203/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1203/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Laxminarayan Ramswarup Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Jalgaon. Maniyar, Sitaram Ramswarup, 105, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Aaqpm9220L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vinay V. Kawdia Revenue By : Shri Harshit Bari Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) In The Absence Of Conditions Precedent For Invoking Provisions Of S. 143(1)(A)(Iii) Of The Act, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Adjustment Of Rs. 8,03,196/- Made By Cpc U/S 143(1)(A)(Iii) Of The Act By Denying The Set Off Of Brought Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation Of Earlier Years Against Current Years Income.

For Appellant: Shri Vinay V. KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

Shahjahan Shahalam Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 5574/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosaina.Ys: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5Section 56(2)

Sol Entertainment Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 11(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4924/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Gourav Bhargava, Bhopal vs. Addl/JCIT(A)-1 Delhi, Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 235/IND/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 253(5)Section 43B

Nikshep Infra Projects, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1602/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Sukruth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 250Section 68

Iqbal Maenuddin Shaikh, Mumbbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward22(1)(6), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 5584/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: ShriIqbal Maennuddin ShaikhFor Respondent: Shri Veerabhadra S Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Shree Sunder Nagar Jain Sangh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) WD 2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3585/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarshree Sunder Nagar Jain V/S. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Sangh बनाम Ward – 2(3), Mtnl Building, C/O G.P. Mehta & Co. Cas Peddar Road, Mumbai–400 026, 807, Tulsiani Chambers, Maharashtra Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacts3778B Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Bhavik Chheda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)

Prajesh Maneklal Rupareliya, Mumbai vs. 33(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 6608/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 254(1)Section 69A

Shri Shailender Vaid, Jammu vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jammu

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

ITA 118/ASR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income- Shailender Vaid, Vs. House No. 179-P, Sector-3, Tax, Circle-L, Jammu (J&K) Trikuta Nagar, Jammu (J & K) Pan No. Aawpv6431C Assessee By Shri Joginder Singh, Ca Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 24.09.2025. Ft . // .2025. Date Of Pronouncement

Section 124Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

Shri Basaveswar Co-Op Credit Society Niyamit, Palabhavi Raibag, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward, Belagavi

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

ITA 218/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 218/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2017-18) Shri Basaveswar Co_Op Credit Vs Ito-Ward-4, Society Niyamit, Feroj Khimjibhai Cpx, . Near Gram Panchayat , Civil Hospital Road Main Road, Belagavi-590001. Palabhavi, Raibag, Karnataka. Belgaum-591235.Karnataka. Pan .No.Aagas9132A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Ms.Shree Raksha.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 04.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 10.11.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-3 Chennai Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Nfac/ Cit(A) Sustaining Addition U/Sec68 Of The Act & The Denial Of Claim Of Deduction Under Section 80P Of The Act Applying The Provisions Of Section 80Ac Of The Act. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is A Credit Cooperative Society Engaged In Providing The Credit Facilities To Members. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Based On The Information & Data Analytics/ Cash Transactions Data

Section 80ASection 80P