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)

Rajshree Electricals & Associate Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 73/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.73/Ctk/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rajshree Electricals & Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Associate Private Limited, 1St Floor, Ddl-556, Phase-Ii, Dumduma Housing Board Colony, Dumduma, Bhubaneswar-751019 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafcr 6010 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Purna Chandra Mishra, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- 2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 10.11.2017 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0187/2016- 17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Ld. Commissioner Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Bhubaneswar Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.18,00,000/- Made By The Ao Under The Head Unexplained Share Capital On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2 Bhubaneswar Should Have Considered The Written Submission Dt.15.9.2917(Page -9 To 11) Wherein All Details Of Creditor-Director, Smt.Urmila Tripathy I.E. Identity, Genuineness Of Transaction, Creditworthiness Of Financial Strength & Detailed Address With Permanent Account Number Were Given. 3. That The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2 Bhubaneswar Should Have Considered The Investment Of Rs.18,00,000/- Made By The Director, Smt. Urmila Tripathy In The Hands Of The Director Instead Of In The Hands Of Assessee-Company In The Light Of Supreme Court’S Decision

For Appellant: Shri Purna Chandra Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, CITDR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Ramesh Chandra Tibrewal, Angul vs. ITO, Angul Ward, Angul

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

ITA 128/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.128/Ctk/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Ramesh Chandra Tibrewal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, At:Boinda, Po:Kishoreganj Angul Ward, Angul, Odisha Dist: Angul, Odisha-759127 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanpt 1412 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- 2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 25.12.2017 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0201/2016- 17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Law By Dismissing The Appeal Ex-Party Without Providing Adequate Opportunity & Presuming The Assessee Is Not Interested In The Appeal Violates The Principle Of Natural Justice. Hence The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit Appeal Needs To Be Annulled. 2. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowances Of Rs. 10,82,835/- In An Ex- Party Order Even Without Examining The Merits Of The Case Is Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law & Hence The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit Appeal Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By Ao Simply Because Of Non Submission Of Related Papers Is Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law & Hence The Claim Of The Assessee As Exempted Long Term Capital Gain U/S 10(38)

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Bijay Kumar Tibrewal, Angul vs. ITO, Angul Ward, Angul

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

ITA 127/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.127/Ctk/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Bijay Kumar Tibrewal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, At:Boinda, Po:Kishoreganj Angul Ward, Angul, Odisha Dist: Angul, Odisha-759127 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abfpt 3971 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- 2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 25.12.2017 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0200/2016- 17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Law By Dismissing The Appeal Ex-Party Without Providing Adequate Opportunity & Presuming The Assessee Is Not Interested In The Appeal Violates The Principle Of Natural Justice. Hence The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit Appeal Needs To Be Annulled. 2. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowances Of Rs.16,76,800/- In An Ex- Party Order Even Without Examining The Merits Of The Case Is Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law & Hence The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit Appeal Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By Ao Simply Because Of Non Submission Of Related Papers Is Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law & Hence The Claim Of The Assessee As Exempted Long Term Capital Gain U/S 10(38)

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)