Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 139(5) is CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. (391 ITR 274), cited in 286 of the 289 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 139(5)

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
391 ITR 274 · 2017 · Supreme Court
286
citing judgments

Deduction under Section 10A or 10AA of the Income-tax Act is computed on the profits of the eligible unit without first setting off losses from other units or non-eligible units. Conversely, losses incurred by an eligible unit are allowed to be set off against the assessee's other taxable business profits.

Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT
333 ITR 335 · 2011 · Reported
242
citing judgments
PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.
140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

DCIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
88 ITD 273 · 2004 · ITAT
169
citing judgments

Interest, sales tax, and purchase tax subsidies received by an assessee are generally considered capital receipts, not revenue income, for income tax purposes.

Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT
348 ITR 344 · 2012 · High Court
164
citing judgments

The Kerala High Court held that charitable institutions claiming exemption under Section 11 are not entitled to claim depreciation on assets used for charitable purposes, taking a view contrary to most other High Courts.

CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.
354 ITR 630 · 2013 · High Court
160
citing judgments

If an assessee possesses sufficient interest-free own funds to cover investments yielding exempt income, it is presumed that such investments are made from these own funds, precluding any disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A, even when borrowed funds are also available.

CIT v. ITI Ltd.
313 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
142
citing judgments

An employer is not statutorily obligated to collect evidence from employees regarding the actual utilization of amounts paid towards leave travel concession or conveyance allowance, unless specific requirements are mandated by law or a CBDT circular.

CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers
400 ITR 279 · 2018 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

A subsidy is classified as a capital receipt if its object is to enable the assessee to set up or expand a new or existing unit. Conversely, it is a revenue receipt if its purpose is to help the assessee run the business more profitably.

CIT v. Sitex Industries Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 171 · 2017 · High Court
117
citing judgments

Disallowance of interest expenses under section 14A is not applicable when the assessee possesses sufficient interest-free own funds for investments that yield exempt income.

Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT
15 SOT 252 · 2007 · ITAT
111
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must grant the correct deduction after due verification of claims made by the assessee, even if not perfectly articulated initially. This principle applies in assessment proceedings, including those involving specific deductions like those for export-oriented units under Section 10B.

Judgments on Section 139(5)

THE JAND CO-OPERATIVE P.S LTD,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JARGON

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1075/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1073 & 1075/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Jand Cooperative P S Ltd., Ito, बना Village Jand Barundi Ward 2, Bo Ludhiana, Jagraon, म Punjab Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabt1846P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) Assessee By : Sh. Tejinder Joshi, Advocate L(Virtual Mode) Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2026 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026 आदेश/Order These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Both Dated 23.06.2025 & 24.06.2025 Respectively, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2018–19 & 2019–20, Arising Out Of Intimation Issued Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Since The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Identical, The 2 1073 & 1075-Chd-2025 Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Sh. Tejinder Joshi, Advocate l(Virtual Mode)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(f)

THE JAND MILK CO-OPERATIVE P.S. LTD,VILLAGE JAND BARUNDI BO LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 , JAGRAON

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1073/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1073 & 1075/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Jand Cooperative P S Ltd., Ito, बना Village Jand Barundi Ward 2, Bo Ludhiana, Jagraon, म Punjab Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaabt1846P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) Assessee By : Sh. Tejinder Joshi, Advocate L(Virtual Mode) Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2026 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026 आदेश/Order These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, Both Dated 23.06.2025 & 24.06.2025 Respectively, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2018–19 & 2019–20, Arising Out Of Intimation Issued Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Since The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Is Identical, The 2 1073 & 1075-Chd-2025 Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

For Appellant: Sh. Tejinder Joshi, Advocate l(Virtual Mode)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(f)

SHARANJIT KAUR,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 237/CHANDI/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.237/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Smt. Sharanjit Kaur Ito Ward-2 (1) बनाम/ Vs. H. No. 2359, Sector – 23C, Aaykar Bhawan, Sector – 17 Chandigarh - 160023 Chandigarh - 160017 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acwpk-0060-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri M. R. Sharma (Advocate) & Om Datt Sharma (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-02-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 19-03-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Laliet Kumar () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 09-01-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act On 23-03-2022. The Prime Grievance Of The Assessee Is Denial Of Deduction U/S 54F Under The Head Long-Term Capital Gains

For Appellant: S/Shri M. R. Sharma (Advocate) & Om DattFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 118Section 139(5)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

Showing 120 of 289 · Page 1 of 15

...