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)

Indrawati, Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-2, Panipat

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1425/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(1)Section 154

ACIT Circle-7(2), New Delhi vs. Manish Sabharwal, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8528/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Suneja, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 80Section 801CSection 80I

Krown Agro Foods Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-14(1) C.R. Building, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2384/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 34Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

S.A. Aluminium, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 27/RPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 27/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 S.A. Aluminium 17/198 Station Road, Nahar Para, Raipur (C.G.)-492 009 Pan: Ackfs5874J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Chhajed, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 234CSection 40

Indore Contract Bridge Association Yeashwant Club, Indore vs. ITO, Ward-Examption, Indore

ITA 403/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Indore Contract Bridge Cpc, Association, Bangalore बनाम/ Yashwant Club, Race Course Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaai 1652 F Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

Court Chambers Premises Co-Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2939/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blecourt Chambers Premises V. Centralized Processing Centre Co.Op Society Limited Income-Tax Department Ground Floor Bengaluru - 560500 Court Chambers Co-Op. Society Limited 35, New Marine Lines Pan: Aaaac0133H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

Kunwar Ayub Ali, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3137/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

Dr. Ashok John, Mungeli vs. Income Tax Officer-2(2), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 24/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 24/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dr. Ashok John, Hospital Daupara, Bilaspur Road, Mungeli (C.G.)-495 334 Pan: Adnpj0381R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-2(2), Bilaspur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 155Section 186

M/S. Dignagar Samabai Krishi Unnayan Samiti Ltd., Nadia vs. I.T.O., Ward - 41(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 683/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(1)(ii)Section 80P

Anoopkumar Devidas Raimalani, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3166/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleanoopkumar Devidas Vs. Ito 18(1)(1), Raimalani, Earnest House, Manav Jewellers, Patwa Narimanpoint, Chawl, Ground Floor, Mumbai.-400021. 80, Sheikh Menon, Street, Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai-400002. Pan/Gir No. : Aaapr8626H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Om Kandalkar.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Jayashree Thakur Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Om Kandalkar.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Jayashree Thakur
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 57

Rajat Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO-Ward-70(1), New Delhi

ITA 2025/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2025/Del/2022, A.Y. 2019-20 Sh. Rajat Agarwal Vs. Asst. Director Of Income Tax- E-384, Greater Kailash-Ii, Centralized Processing Centre New Delhi-110048 Bengaluru, Karnataka Pan : Aagpa1259H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

Indian Red Cross Society vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

WP(C)/31520/2022HC Kerala12 Apr 2023
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 154

Central Charitable Trust, Jafarpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Varanasi

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

ITA 12/VNS/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi12 Apr 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalecentral Charitable Trust Vs. Income Tax Officer Jafrapur- 276001, Exemption, Uttar Pradesh. Wardayakarbhawan, Maqboolalam Road, Varanasi 221002 Uttar Pradesh Pan/Gir No. : Aabtc4875G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shriarvind Shukla, Advocate Respondentby : Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A)Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Central Charitable Trust “1. Because The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Trust Running Educational Institution Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In The Correct Perspective. 2. Because The Learned Ao As Well As The Learned Cit(A) Have Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Is Engaged Solely In Running An Educational Institution Having Gross Receipts Below One Crore & Hence No Part Of His Receipts/Income Was Taxable By Virtue Of Clear Unambiguous Provisions Of Section 10(232)(Iiiad). 3. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution By Clear Provisions Of Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) With Unrelated Provisions Of Section 11/12A When Such Sections Should Not Be Applied To The Facts Of The Case. 4. Because The Authorities Below Have Sought To Deny The Benefit Available To The Educational Institution On The Basis Of Some Inadvertent Technical Errors In Filing Return Without Appreciating The Facts Of The Case. 5. Because The Order Is Bad In Law As Well As On Facts.”

For Appellant: ShriArvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(232)(iiiad)Section 10ASection 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 250

Aa368 Appakudal Pudupalayam Agri Co-Op Credit Society, Erode vs. ADIT-CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 639/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.639/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Aa368 Appakudal Pudupalayam Agri Vs. The Assistant Director Of Co-Op. Credit Society, Pudupalayam, Income Tax - Cpc, Sakthi Nagar, Erode 638 315. Bengaluru. [Pan: Aacaa0858K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode] ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2023 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 08.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee The Assessee Is A Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society Limited Registered Under The Tamilnadu Co-Operative Societies Act,1983. The Assessee Filed The 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate [Erode]For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

M/S. the Ajanta Ideal Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Director of Incometax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 604/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Ajanta Ideal Co- Vs. Adit,Cpc Operative Housing 1Stfloor,Prestigealpha, Society Ltd, 7/1+2, Hosour Road, Ajanta Apartments, Bengaluru-560100. Near Bus Station, 75, Colaba Road, Mumbai-400005 Pan/Gir No. : Aaaat7871M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Jayashree Thakur.DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(19)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

Beliram Industrial Estate Premises Co-Op Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result the appeal filed by the appeal is allowed

ITA 590/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalebeliram Industrialestate Vs. Adit,Cpc, Premises Co- Soc Ltd., Bengaluru-560500 Sv Road, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaab6799E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Prakash Shah.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 27.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Prakash Shah.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Jayashree Thakur.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)(d)

Paramjit Singh Surjit Singh Sethi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-22(2)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 513/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleparamjit Singh Surjit Vs. Ito- 22(2)(5) Singh Sethi, Room.No 307,Piramal 3Rd Floor Sagar Darshan, Chambers Lalbaug, 40 North Avenue Road, Mumbai-400012. Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400054. Pan/Gir No. : Aajps2891L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Bharat Kumar.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Bharat Kumar.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Jayashree Thakur.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 511/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalebombay Sarvodaya Vs. Acit, Cpc Mandal, Post No 2, 299, Shantashram, Electronic City, Javaji Dadji Road, Bangalore-560500. Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb0020H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Samir Shah.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Mr.Samir Shah.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Jayashree Thakur.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A

Mr. Ramesh Manchhalal Purohit, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Ward-19(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 507/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalemr. Ramesh Manchhalal Vs. Ito – 19(3)(1) Purohit, 202, 2Nd Floor, 72 Mg Mahimtura Marg, Matrumandir, Tardeo, Khumbharwada,3Rdlane, Mumbai – 400007. Mumbai-400004 Pan/Gir No. : Aagpr9146Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Ground Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Dismissed On Account Of Delay In Filling The Appeal Without Giving Proper Opportunity To The Assessee. Ramesh Manchhalal Purohit, Mumbai. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business & Has Filed The Return Of Income For The A.Y 2012-13 Disclosing A Total Income Of Rs.3,56,590/-And The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Further The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessing Officer(A.O) Made Additions In Respect Of Interest Income Of Rs. 55,312/- & Agricultural Income Of Rs.2,95,410/- & The Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Determining The Assessed Income Of Rs.7,07,310/-. Subsequently The Ao Has Received Information From The Ito (Inv), Thane In Respect Of Transactions By The Assessee With M/S Pramod Steel Company Of Rs. 10 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Jayashree Thakur.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148

Salasar Balaji Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1947/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of The Return. 3. The Appellant Therefore Prays Your Honour To Be Kind Enough To - 1. Admit The Appeal & Grant Stay Against The Recovery Of Demand, 2. Set Aside The Order Of A.O., 3. Delete All Illegal Additions. & Disallowances Made By A.O. 4. Grant Justice. 4. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Delete, Change Or Modify All Or Any Of The Above Grounds Of Appeal Which Are Independent & Without Prejudice To Each Other.”

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B