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)

DCIT 12(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Blue Square Corporate Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the CO of the assessee as well as appeal of Revenue, both are dismissed

ITA 2061/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2061/Mum/2017 (यनर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Blue Square Corporate Income Tax Officer, Services Pvt. Ltd. Circle-12(1)(2), Room No. 103, 10Th Floor, Yugdharma, बनाम/ 223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Off Link Road, Goregaon Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Rd, Mumbai-20 (West), Mumbai-400 062 (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aadcb4038M प्रत्याक्षेप सM./ Co No. 273/Mum/2018 (Arising In Ita No. 2061/Mum/2017 For Ay 2009-10) M/S Blue Square Corporate The Dy. Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, 103, 10Th Floor, Yugdharma, Circle-12(1)(2), Room No. बनाम/ Off Link Road, Goregaon 223, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Vs. (West), Mumbai-400 062 Bhavan, M.K. Rd, Mumbai-20 (आपत्ति करनेवाला / Cross Objector) (प्रत्यर्थी/ मूल अपीलार्थी / Respondent/Orig. Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Dr प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28.11.19 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.19

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, DRFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Joshi, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, Krishnagiri vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Salem

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1339/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1338 & 1339/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, The Income Tax Officer, 655/20 & 600, Jagilkathirampatti Vs. Exemptions Ward, Village & Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Salem. Krishnagiri District 635 206. [Pan:Aaits5220J ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Both Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Against The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Under Section 154 Of The Act. Against The Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Holding That Non-Allowance Of Expenditure Incurred To Earn Gross Receipts From A College & School Involves A Complex & Debatable Legal Issue.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154

Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, Krishnagiri vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Salem

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1338/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1338 & 1339/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, The Income Tax Officer, 655/20 & 600, Jagilkathirampatti Vs. Exemptions Ward, Village & Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Salem. Krishnagiri District 635 206. [Pan:Aaits5220J ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Both Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Against The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Under Section 154 Of The Act. Against The Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Holding That Non-Allowance Of Expenditure Incurred To Earn Gross Receipts From A College & School Involves A Complex & Debatable Legal Issue.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154

ACIT -Circle -7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Printel Cardz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6131/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6131/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) A.C.I.T, Circle-7(3)(2) M/S. Printel Cardz Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ 1St Floor, Room No. 128A, 135 A-Z Industrial Estate, G.K Marg, Lower Parel, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 013 Mumbai-400020. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aadcp1723F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : None सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 16.12.2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 20.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -13 In Short Referred As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, Mumbai, Dated 20/07/2018 For Assessment Year (In Short Ay) 2010-11, Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Allowed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Penalty A.Y 2010-11 M/S. Printed Cardz P.Ltd . Order Passed U/S 271 (1) (C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short The ‘Act’) By Deleting The Same.

For Appellant: Shri Kumar PadmapaniFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 274