Section 139 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.263

Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 of the 3,629 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 139

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court
1,589
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
293 ITR 226 · 2007 · Supreme Court
576
citing judgments

The deductor cannot be treated as an assessee-in-default under Section 201(1) if the deductee has already paid the tax or offered the impugned receipts in their return of income. However, interest under Section 201(1A) for delayed deposit of tax can still be levied up to the date of filing of the return of income by the deductee.

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO
203 ITR 456 · 1993 · Supreme Court
396
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid even after a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), provided the Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe, based on definite, specific, and reliable information, that income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to fully and truly disclose material facts.

CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.
354 ITR 536 · 2013 · High Court
366
citing judgments

Reassessment of income, especially after a summary assessment under Section 143(1), requires the Assessing Officer to possess fresh, tangible material to form a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; a mere reappraisal of existing records or a change of opinion without new material is not permissible.

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Udaipur v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh Ltd.
35 Taxmann.com 616 · 2013 · High Court
304
citing judgments

No disallowance can be made under Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B for delayed payment of employee's contributions to ESI or PF if these amounts are deposited by the assessee on or before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). This aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions for allowability.

Canara Housing Development Co. v. DCIT
49 Taxmann.com 98 · 2014 · High Court
283
citing judgments

Proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act are not confined solely to incriminating material found during a search, and the Assessing Officer can assess total income for the relevant years.

State of West Bengal v. Kesoram Industries Limited
10 SCC 201 · 2004 · Supreme Court
279
citing judgments

A taxing statute must be interpreted strictly based on what is clearly expressed, without implying anything not stated or importing provisions to supply deficiencies. A person must clearly fall within the ambit of the charging section for tax to be levied.

Jai Steel (India) v. Asstt. CIT
36 Taxmann.com 523 · 2013 · High Court
267
citing judgments

An assessee cannot claim deductions or expenditures in a Section 153A assessment that were not claimed in the original completed assessment, even if documents were found during a search.

CIT v. Foramer France
264 ITR 566 · 2003 · Supreme Court
253
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

Judgments on Section 139

Jayagauri Premabhai Patel, Vadodara vs. ITO, Ward-4(1)(5), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1021/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavassessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Jayagauri Premabhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 27, Satyam Prima Duplex, Ward-4(1)(5), B/H. Hotel Tapi, Dashrath, Vadodara Vadodara-391740 Pan : Aeopp 6814 R अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) थ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ" Assessee By : Shri Sakar Sharma, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/01/2022 सुनवाई क" तारीख सुनवाई क" तारीख सुनवाई क" तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/01/2022 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Vadodara [“Cit(A)” In Short] Dated 13.02.2018 Passed For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Three Grounds Of Appeal. In The First Ground Of Appeal, She Has Pleaded That No Notice Was Served Upon Her Under Section 143(2) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ In Short). However, This Ground Was Not Pressed; Hence The Same Is Rejected Being Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Shri Nitin Ishwarbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(14), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2011-12 Shri Nitin Ishwarbhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, 8, Narayan Darshan, Thaltej, Vs Ward-3(3)(14), Ahmedabad-380059 Ahmedabad Pan : Accpp 3726 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hem Chajad, Ar Revenue By : Shri D. B. Gohil, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/12/2021 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav: The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A)” In Short] Dated 24.01.2019 Passed For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Originally The Assessee Has Taken 4 Grounds Of Appeal Wherein He Has Challenged Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.12,28,000/-. However, During The Pendency Of The Appeal, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Permission To Raise An Additional Ground Of Appeal. In The Additional Ground Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged Reopening Of The Assessment. Since The Additional Ground Of Appeal Goes To The Root Of The Cause & Substantially Affect The Rights Of The Assessee; Therefore, In View Of The Judgment Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs Cit, Reported In (1998) 229 Itr 383 (Sc), He Is Permitted To Raise The Additional Ground Of Appeal. Shri Nitin Ishwarbhai Patel Vs. Ito Ay : 2011-12 2

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chajad, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. B. Gohil, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(a)Section 2(47)