Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(1) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 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 143(1) is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 of the 12,311 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 143(1)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment 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).

CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.
367 ITR 466 · 2014 · Supreme Court
1,558
citing judgments

Taxing statutes are presumed to operate prospectively unless a clear contrary intention for retrospective application is evident. The law applicable for determining tax liability is that which stands on the first day of the assessment year, following the principle that law looks forward, not backward (lex prospicit non respicit).

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. Alom Extrusions Ltd.
319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court
1,344
citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.
198 ITR 297 · 1992 · Supreme Court
814
citing judgments

A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Totagars Cooperative Sale Society
392 ITR 74 · 2017 · High Court
762
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a cooperative society from its investments or surplus deposits with a cooperative bank is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

Judgments on Section 143(1)

Delhi Neurological Association, Delhi vs. ITO Ward Exemptions-1(3), Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 821/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.821/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2023-24) Delhi Neurological Association, R.No. 529, Academic Block, Department Of Neuro Surgery, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Darya Ganj, Delhi 110002 Pan: Aaajd-0582-E बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption 1(3), ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Delhi अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/05/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 13/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 24.12.2024, For Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act'). The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year Declaring Nil Income. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed U/S. 143(1) Of The Act On 29.10.2024 Making Addition Of Rs.20,18,585/- As The Mandatory Audit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

Ashok Poddar Foundation, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Exempt, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1046/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1046/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-23 Ashok Poddar Foundation……………………...………………..….……….Appellant Ground Floor, 2, Gurusaday Road, Ballygunge, Kol-19. [Pan: Aaeta1013B] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), Exempt, Kolkata ………................................……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sima Das Biswas, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Delhi Dated 04.04.2025 [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)] For The Assessment Year 2023–24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee, Cpc, Bengaluru Disallowed An Exemption Of Rs.28,12,542/- & The Disallowance Was Made On The Ground That Form 10B/10Bb Was Filed On 28.11.2023 Which Was Only Accepted By The Assessee On 20.11.2023. Consequently, The Addition Of Rs.20.70,688/- Was Added To The Total Income Of The Assessee Determining Tax Of Rs.5,64,030/- Including Interest Of Rs.85,690/- U/S 234B Of The Act & Rs.22,777/- U/S 234C Of The Act. 3. Aggrieved By The Above Order, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A), Where The Contention Of The Assessee Was That The

Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234C

Shashi Prabhu & Associates, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

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

ITA 2713/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Shashi Prabhu & Associates Assistant Commissioner Of C Wankhede Stadium, Income Tax, Mumbai D-Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - Vs. 400020 (Pan : Aaafs3813K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis,Ca Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 4, Kolkata, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1073259510(1), Dated 13.02.2025 Passed Against Intimation By Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru, U/S. 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 09.03.2019 For Assessment Year 2017- 18. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: " 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Granting Tds Credit Of Rs. 91,57,596/- Only As Against Rs. 1,31,74,662/- Claimed In The Income Tax Return Resulting In Short Granting Of Tds Credit On A Incorrect Assumption Of Fact That The Tds Credit Of Rs. 39,38,139 Had Already Been Allowed To Appellant Firm In Ay 2016-17, Which Is Wrong & Contrary To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Provisions Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Rules Made There Under.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis,CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234C