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)

Jamal Mohideen Haroon Imran Khan, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non-Cororate Ward-1(2), Chennai

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

ITA 452/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.452/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jamal Mohideen Haroon Imran Khan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 15/7, Vijayaragava Road First Street, Non Corporate Ward 1(2), T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan:Aaopi4540B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.05.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 23.06.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 227 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay In The Form Of An Affidavit By Stating As Under: 1. I Am An Individual & Petitioner/Appellant In The Impugned Proceedings Before This Hon’Ble Tribunal. I Am Well Acquainted With The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148

M/S Cigfillimited, Chennai vs. ADIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 132/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.132/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Cigfil Limited, Vs. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant 37, Armenian Street, Parrys, Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Chennai 600 001. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. [Pan:Aaacc3120C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.04.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 19.12.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 21.10.2018 Declaring Total Income Of ₹. Nil (Current Year Loss ₹.21,39,354/-) & The Same Was 2

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

Gayatri Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CPC/ITO.22(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 114/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.114/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2019-20) Gayatri Commercial Premises बिधम/ Cpc/Ito, 22 (1)(4) Co-Op, Society Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers Vs. Unit No. 102/103, Behind Lalbaugh Mumbai- 400034 Mittal Ind. Estate Andheri Kurla Andheri (East) Mumbai- 400059 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaag5064D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. N.R. Agarwal Revenue By: Shri. Krishna Kumar, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश/Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13-12-2022 For Ay 2019-20 Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 93,20,286/-. 2. The Assessee Society Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal Reads As Under: - “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.93,20,286/- As A Business Income In Order Passed U/S 143(1) & 154 Of The Act By Cpc. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Granting Deduction Under Mutuality Principal.” 3. The Regarding Ground No. 1, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee By Observing As Under: - “The Ld. Cit(A) Has Rejected The Assessees’S The Ground Of Appeal By Observing At Para No. 7 Of The Impugned Order As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri. N.R. AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Kumar, (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)

Home First Finance Company India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (CPC) & DCIT, Circle 10(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2109/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2109/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Home First Finance बिधम/ Acit, Cpc (Respondent Company India Limited No.1) Vs. 511, Acme Plaza 136, Dcit, Circle-10(1)(1), Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai (Respondent Andheri East-400059. No.2) 209, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacch3317E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pratik Shah Revenue By: Dr. Samuel Pitta (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.06.2022 For Ay. 2019-20. 2. Even Though, We Had Allowed The Appeal Vide Order Dated 28.09.2022, The Same Has Been Recalled In Ma No. 209/Mum/2023. The Only Issue Is Regarding The Disallowance Confirmed By Ld. Cit(A) Regarding Employee’S Contribution Towards Pf/Esi To The Tune Of Rs.42,34,050/-. 3. We Have Heard Both The Parties & Perused The Records. The Cpc Banglore Processed The Return Of Income U/S 143(1) Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) & Made Adjustment Of Rs.42,34,050/- U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act For Late Deposit Of Employee’S Contribution To Epf/Esic Beyond The Due Date As Prescribed In The Specified Act (Pf/Esic Acts). The Assessee Has Referred The Decision Of Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court In The Case

For Appellant: Shri Pratik ShahFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta (Sr. AR)
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)