Section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.263

Section 139(4) 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(4) is Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (384 ITR 490), cited in 631 of the 902 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 139(4)

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. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association
247 ITR 201 · 2001 · Supreme Court
112
citing judgments

While there is no statutory time limit for filing Form 10 to claim exemption for income accumulation under Section 11(2), it must be furnished before the completion of assessment proceedings for the Assessing Officer to grant the exemption.

ATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND OTHERS. 39. (1978) 3 SCC 544: MADHAV HAYAWADANRAO HOSKOT v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA. 40
3 SCC 261 · 1997 · Reported
106
citing judgments

The constitutional validity of an enactment can be supported by arguments that it would pass legal tests.

CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur
357 ITR 638 · 2013 · Reported
91
citing judgments

The benefit of Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains is not available when transactions in penny stocks are found to be part of a scheme involving price manipulation or accommodation entries, indicating the gains are not genuine and lack actual investment.

AA520 Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
138 Taxmann.com 571 · 2022 · High Court
78
citing judgments

The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) can deny deductions claimed under Chapter VI-A, such as Section 80P, during the processing of a return under Section 143(1) if conditions for claiming such deductions, including filing the return by the due date as per Section 80AC, are not met.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Additional Director of Income Tax
292 ITR 49 · 2007 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion or reappraisal of existing facts, but require new or fresh tangible material or information indicating escapement of income.

Nileshwar Range Kallu Chethu Vyavasaya Thozhilali Sahakarana Sangham v. CIT
459 ITR 730 · 2023 · High Court
76
citing judgments

Timely filing of the income-tax return under section 139(1) is a mandatory condition for claiming deductions under Chapter VI-A, including section 80P, especially for Assessment Years 2018-19 onwards due to the amendment to section 80AC. Such deductions are not allowable if the return is filed belatedly or in response to a section 148 notice.

Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v. ACIT
112 Taxmann.com 134 · 2019 · Supreme Court
66
citing judgments

The Supreme Court considered the delay in filing an appeal and the appellant's justification for it. The court noted that the appellant's registered address was used for communication and that the postal authorities returned mail. The court referenced its earlier decision in 'Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT' when considering the appellant's case.

CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Jalan
286 ITR 274 · 2006 · High Court
66
citing judgments

Section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, which allows for filing a belated return, acts as a proviso to Section 139(1). Consequently, the time limit for depositing amounts or utilizing funds to claim exemptions, such as under Section 54, extends up to the due date for filing a return under Section 139(4).

CIT v. Ms. Jagriti Aggarwal
339 ITR 610 · 2011 · High Court
66
citing judgments

A return of income filed within the period allowed under Section 139(4) is valid for claiming exemptions and deductions, including those under Sections 54, 54F, and 80AC. However, depositing the unutilized capital gains in the Capital Gains Account Scheme is a statutory and mandatory requirement for claiming exemption under Section 54F.

Judgments on Section 139(4)

Shri Inamul Haq, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Saharanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3300/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Inamul Haq S/O Sh. Mohd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamin, Vill.Megh Chhappar, Ward-2. Ambalaa Road, Saharanpur (U.P) Saharanpur Pan: Aaiph2840K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(4)

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department vs. Navinchandra Veljibhai Shahq, Jamnagar

In the result, the appellant's appeal is partly allowed

ITA 401/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.401/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) The Income Tax Officer, Wd – Vs. Navinchandra Veljibhai Shah 1(3), Income Tax Department, Ramesh Stores Samkrit Building, Room No. 209, Aayakar Bhavan, Street No. 11, Kamdar Colony Jamnagar – 361006 Jamnagar – 361006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Basps6529R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2025 Dates Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 44ASection 69A

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1962/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. Aci 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6144/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Sri Bhuvaneswari Nilayam, Tirumala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Guntur

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

ITA 519/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.519/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Sri Bhuvaneswari Nilayam Vs. Income Tax Officer Tirumala Ward 1(1) Pan:Aawts0401P Guntur (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Uday & Gopi, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Sri Bhuvaneswari Nilayam (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-2,Ahmedabad (“Ld. First Appellate Authority”) Dated 15/02/2024 For The A.Y 2020-21. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 242 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Accompanied By An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. In This Regard, The Learned

For Appellant: Shri Uday & Gopi, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR
Section 11Section 143(1)

Late Shri Chhatrasinh J.Vaghela Thru L/H Kamlaben C.Vaghela, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 828/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B Before Dr. B.R.R. Kumar Kumar, , , , Vice Vice-Before Before Dr. B Dr. B Kumar Kumar Viceshri Siddhartha Nautiyal Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalshri Siddhartha Nautiyal Shri Siddhartha Nautiyallate Shri Chhatrasingh J. Vs. Vaghela, Income-Tax Officer, Through L/H Kamlaben C. Ward-1, Vaghela, At & Post : Sargasan, Gandhinagar Sargasan, Gandhinagar-382421 [Pan : Atnpv 4710 C]

For Appellant: Appellant byFor Respondent: Respondent by Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54B

Indian Medical Association Pune Branch, Shukrawar Peth vs. DCIT Exemption Circle, Pune, Swargate

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

ITA 764/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.764/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Indian Medical Association V Dcit, Pune Branch, S Exemption Circle, Pune. 992, Dr.Nitu Mandke, Ima House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002. Pan: Aaati2653M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 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(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.02.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 22.05.2021 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

Jaro Institute of Technology Management and Research Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5062/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Jaro Institute Of Technology Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Management & Research Ltd. Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai 11Th Floor, Vikas Centre, Dr. C. G. Vs. Road, Chembur, Fci, S.O. Mumbai – 400074. Pan/Gir No. Aaccj2107Q (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jay Thakkar Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1.0 On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing The 1" Appeal Of 118 Days & Ought To Have Considered The Bonafide Reasons & Compelling Circumstances, Supported With Affidavit, That Had Precluded The Appellant To File The 1" Appeal In Time, 2.0 On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Deleted The Disallowance Of Sales & Promotion Expenses Of Rs.2,73,78,889, Jaro Institution Of Technology Management & Research Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Jay ThakkarFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, SR DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40

Veena Singh, Gwalior vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Gwalior

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 324/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 253(3)Section 68

Sanju Soni, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

14. In view of the above findings, both the appeals deserve to be allowed

ITA 899/JODH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Soni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ayushi Sharma, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

Sanju Soni, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

14. In view of the above findings, both the appeals deserve to be allowed

ITA 898/JODH/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Soni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ayushi Sharma, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

Gurumalleshwara Padavldharara Pathina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mysore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1077/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Pranava Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for the Revenue
Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 80P

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Indore vs. Java Builders Pvt Ltd(Formerly Java Foods Pvt Ltd), Indore

Appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 279/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Java Builders Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax (Central)-2 (Formerly Java Foods Pvt. Ltd.), 16, Khajarana Square, बनाम/ Ghanshyam Castle, Vs. Opposite Subh Labh, Indore (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aaccj5636L Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Ms. Richa Parwal, Ar Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

Section 115BSection 132Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271ASection 69B

Herd Educational & Medical Research Foundation, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer 4(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 323/NAG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Shikha Loya, Ld. Amicus CuriaeFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Shri Pandurang Sansthan Deulgaon Mali, Mehkar vs. ITO Ward-2, Exemp, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 487/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Pandurang Sansthan Ito (Exemption), Deulgaon Mali At Post Deulgaon Ward-2, Nagpur. Vs. Mahi, Mehkar-443001 Pan: Aagts 8497 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Nanasaheb Bhagawan Sasar, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Pune

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

ITA 722/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 194ASection 234A

The Somalwar Academy Education Societies Employees Co-Op Credit Society Mar., Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer, War 1(5), Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 17/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

The Dholka Nagaric Bachat Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(5), Ahmedabad

ITA 643/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Dholka Nagaric Bachat The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Ward-3(2)(5), Nr. Old Bus Station, Malav Ahmedabad. Talav Road, Dholka, Ahmedabad-387810. [Pan :Aactt0173 D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S N Divatia, Ar Respondent By: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 80P(2)

Meena J Patel, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Mysuru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 420/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2023-24 Meena Jayantilal Patel, Vs. Ito, # 4, Sri Geetha Glass & Plywood, New Ward – 2(4), Sayaji Rao Road, New Bamboo Bazaar, Mysuru. Mysuru – 570 021, Karnataka. Pan : Afgpp 2236 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasa, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 1Section 115BSection 131(1)Section 139Section 139(4)Section 143(1)

Naraseepuram Paccs, Coimbatore vs. Non Corp Ward 4(1), Cbe, Coimbatore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1697/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George Kआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1696 & 1697/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2020-21 M/S. Naraseepuram Paccs, The Income Tax Officer, Poondi Road, Narasipuram B.O, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 4(1), Narasipuram, Coimbatore Coimbatore – 641 109. Pan: Aaaan 9388H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sudhakar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Y. Sudarshan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Two Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Both Dated 26.05.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2017-18 & 2020-21. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised Is Whether The First Appellate Authority (Faa) Is Justified In Confirming The Ao’S Action In Denying The Claim Of Deduction U/S.80P Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Y. Sudarshan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)