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)

Pantheerankave Service Co-Operative Bank, Kozhikode vs. ITO, Ward -2(3), Kozhikode

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

ITA 368/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pantheerankav Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Olavanna, Kozhikode 673019 [Pan: Aaaap6394F] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Arun Raj S., Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 12.12.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Classified As A Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society. The Appellant Had Not Filed Return Of Income Under The Provisions Of Section 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Ay 2017-18. Based On The Information That The Appellant Made

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

Pananchery Service Cooperative Bank, Thrissur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Thrissur

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

ITA 649/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Pananchery Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant Pattikad, Pananchery, Thrissur 680652 [Pan: Aabap5815A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Thrissur .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Amaljith P.J., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 24.05.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co-Operative Society Registered Under The Kerala State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1969. It Is Classified As Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society. No Return Of Income Was Filed For Ay 2013-14. Therefore, The Ito, Ward-2(4), Thrissur (Hereinafter Called "The Ao") Formed

For Appellant: Shri Amaljith P.J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

Muhammad Zameer Qureshi, Bareilly vs. Pr. CIT, Bareilly

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 344/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Muhammad Zameer Qureshi V. The Pcit 180, Azam Nagar Bareilly Bareilly Tan/Pan:Aacpz6783H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 139(4)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263Section 69

Poomagal Educational and Social Trust, Tirupur vs. ACIT, Exemptions, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1194/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1194/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Nahar, C.A JKFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 154Section 288

Mohammed Fasiulla Sharif, Bengaluru vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 288/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. Phani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 44ASection 69A

Vinayak Bhalchandra Randive, Thane vs. ITO Ward 3(4) Thane, Thane

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

ITA 3005/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 254(1)Section 80CSection 80DSection 80T

Vinayak Bhalchandra Randive, Thane vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Thane

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

ITA 2991/MUM/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 254(1)Section 80CSection 80DSection 80T

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Dcm Shriram Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 927/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

Dcm Shriram Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

ITA 2587/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80ISection 92C

District Probation & After Care Association Satara, Satara vs. ITO, Exemption Ward1(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2607/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Vadamugam Kangayampalayam Primary Agri Co Op Credit Society Ltd, Tirupur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2) Tirupur, Tirupur

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

ITA 1201/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

The Gasper Education Society, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 871/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.871/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) The Gasper Education Society Vs Ito Ward-7 (1), Kolkata 40A, Ajc Bose Road, Nonapukur Tram Depot, Kolkata-700017 Pan No. :Aaabt 0159 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1074097940(1) For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Ld. Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld. Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Processed & The Assessment Came To Be Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Wherein The Assessing Officer Has Denied The Assessee The Benefit Of Sections 11 & 12 Of The Act On The Ground That The Return Filed By The Assessee Was U/S.139(4) Of The Act. It Was The Submission That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Confirmed The Order Of The Assessing Officer. Ld.Ar Drew Our Attention To The Circular Issued By The Cbdt In F.No.173/193/2019-Ita-

For Appellant: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ba)Section 139Section 139(4)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)

Maya Sikshan Prashikshan Sansthan, Mendu Road Hathras vs. Income Tax Officer, Hathras

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 559/AGR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalincome Tax Officer, Maya Sikshan Ward-(3)(4), Prashikshan Sansthan, Vs. Hathras. Ravinder Singh Prakash Textile Compound, Mendu Road, Hathras-204101 Pan-Aaabm5383N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Roads and Bridges Development Corporation of Kerala Ltd, Ernakulam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 568/COCH/2023[A.Y 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2011-12 Roads & Bridges Development .......... Appellant Corporation Of Kerala Ltd. Preethi Building, M.V. Road, Palarivattom Ernakulam 682025 [Pan: Aabcr7841Q] Vs. Acit, Corporte Circles-2(1), Kochi .......... Respondent Appellant By: Smt. Remya S. Menon, Ca Respondent By: Shri Sundarasan S., Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 17.03.2023 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Which Is A Wholly Owned By Government Of Kerala Undertaking. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Construction, Development, Operation & Maintenance Of Railway Over Bridges, Highway Projects, Etc. The 2 Roads & Bridges Development Corporation Of Kerala Ltd. Original Return Of Income For Ay 2011-12 Was Filed On 28.09.2011 Declaring Loss Of Rs. 9,65,43,016/-. The Same Was Revised On 07.01.2013 At A Loss Of Rs. 5,11,71,331/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Acit, Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi Vide Order Dated 30.03.2014 At Total Income Of Rs.2,10,68,827/- Before Set Off Of Brought Forward Loss. Ultimately The Income Was Assessed At Nil Income. Subsequently, The Ao Issued A Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) On 10.04.2015 For The Reason That Income Escaped Assessment To Tax For Following Reasons: -

For Appellant: Smt. Remya S. Menon, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sundarasan S., CIT.DR
Section 139(4)Section 143Section 148

Vividha Karyakari Co-Op Society, Chandrapur vs. ITO Ward-2, Chandrapur

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

ITA 76/NAG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 131(4)Section 139Section 139(4)Section 250Section 80P(2)(d)

Ajinkya Madhyamik Shikshak Sevak Sah. Patsanstha, Maryadit, Satara vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Satara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2214/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Prateek JhaFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80ASection 80P

Shree Amar Kshatriya Sabha Charitable Trust, Jammu vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- ( Exemptions), Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 492/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 492/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21

Section 11Section 119Section 12(1)(b)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 767/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 250

Riddhi Seva Kendra, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Exempt, Kolkata

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

ITA 370/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrariddhi Seva Kendra, Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru, C/O Subas Agarwal & Ito, Ward-1(1), Exempt, Associates, Advocates, Siddha Kolkata Income Tax Office, Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Vs 10B, Middleton Road, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata - 700071 Kolkata - 700069 (Pan: Aaatr2893Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

Annai Trust, Krishnagiri vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Salem

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

ITA 780/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.780/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Annai Trust, The Income Tax Officer, D.No.25/235, Jinna Street, Exemptions Ward, Kaveripattinam(Viil) (Po), Salem Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu 635 112. [Pan: Aadta6748A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 11Section 143(1)(a)