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)

Bharat Jain, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi vs. AO/ADIT-CPC Bengaluru, Civic Centre, New Delhi

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

ITA 4986/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanbharat Jain, Vs. Adit – Cpc, Flat No.133, Pocket G, Sfs Flats, Bengaluru. Maharaja Agarsen Marg, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi – 110 076. (Pan : Aaapj4180E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitin Kanwar, Advocate Shri Shivam Jain, Advocate Shri Rajiv Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ramesh Chand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2024 Date Of Order : 06.08.2024 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 28.08.2024 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Brought To Our Notice Return Of Income Filed By The Assessee For The Ay 2020-21 Wherein The Status Of 2 The Assessee Was Clearly Mentioned As Non-Resident As Residential Status Of The Assessee In Itr 3 Filed On 16.12.2020 With The Acknowledgement No.826193800161220. With The Above Facts On Record, He Submitted That The Authorities Below Proceeded To Apply The Provisions Of Section 44Ada Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For The Reason That Assessee Has Not Maintained Proper Books Of Account For Carrying On The Professional Activities, Therefore, They Applied The Presumptive Tax @ 50%. He Submitted That Provisions Of Section 44Ada Are Not Applicable To The Non-Resident & It Was Wrongly Applied In Assessee’S Case. He Further Submitted That The Ld. Cit (A) Dismissed The Appeal By Observing As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Kanwar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chand, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 30Section 44A

Shubhkaran Triveni Foundation, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(3), Exemption, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 503/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.503/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year. :2022-2023) Shubhkaran Triveni Foundation Vs Ito Ward-1(3), Exemption, Kolkata 1St Floor, 18 Rn Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. : Aagts 8480 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.01.2025 Passed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-11, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2022-2023. 2. None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Posted On Multiple Occasions & None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. As None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee, Therefore, The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Being Heard Ex-Parte Qua The Assessee. 4. A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A) Shows That The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Dismissed By The Ld. Addl/Jcit(A) On Account Of Delay. It Is Noticed That The Intimation U/S.143(1) Of The Act Has Been Issued Making An Addition Of Rs.44 Lakhs Received By The Assessee Towards Corpus Donation.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

Sudha Dhoot, Kolkata vs. AO Ward 40(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.268/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year. :2018-2019) Sudha Dhoot, Vs Assessing Officer Ward-40(4), 29B, Rabindra Sarani, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata Room No.10E, Wb-700001 Pan No. : Adwpd 2538 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-12, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2018-2019 2. None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Ld.Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Delayed By 55 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection In Condoning The Delay. Accordingly, The Delay Of 55 Days Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 4. As The Notice Has Been Sent Through Rpad, Email & Also Through The Revenue & The Acknowledgement Of The Notice Having Been Served Through The Revenue By Rpad Is Available. As None Represented On Behalf

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)