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)

Bhoir Dredging Company P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee, in part

ITA 3701/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/3701-02/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Bhoir Dredging Company Pvt.Ltd. Dcit, 318, Maker Chamber V, Nariman Point Circle 3(1),Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai-400 021. Pan:Aaacb 0473 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-Dr Assessee By: Shri Y.P. Trivedi & Ms. Usha Dalal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.02.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 05.04.2017 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 26/03/2015 Of The Cit (A)-8,Mumbai The Assessee Company Has Filed The Present Appeals.Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Producing Of Sand,Hiring Of Equipments & Ships.It Filed Its Return Of Income On 14/11/2006, Declaring Total Income At Rs.78.93 Lakhs.The Return Was Processed U/S.143 (1) Of The Act & A Demand Of Rs. 25.96 Lakhs Was Raised.

For Appellant: Shri Y.P. Trivedi and Ms. Usha DalalFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 254(1)

Sukhsagar Traders P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(3)2, Mumbai

ITA 7364/MUM/2010[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2017AY 1999-00

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./7364/Mum/2010,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 1999-2000 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Sukhsagar Traders Private Ltd. Ito-8(3)2 301A, Solaris-I, 72 Saki Vihar Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K Road Andheri East , Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 072. Pan:Aaacs 6165 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Dr. A.K. Nayak- Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Dr. Paras Jain सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/03/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dt.3.8.2010 Of Cit(A), Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee-Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 31. 01. 1999,Declaring Income Rs.13. 16 Lakhs.Initially Return Was Processed U/S.143(1) Of The Act. Later On Notice U/S.148 Of The Act Was Issued On 27.3.2006 After Recording The Reasons For Re-Opening.The Assessing Officer (Ao)Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3)R.W.S 147 Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs. 41.46 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Dr. Paras JainFor Respondent: Dr. A.K. Nayak- DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 2

DCIT 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Srs Pharmaceuticals P Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 825/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./825/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./7728/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./826/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 वष" Dy.Cit-2(3)(2) M/S. Srs Pharmaceuticals Pvt.Ltd. Room No.556, 5Th Floor, 601-605, 6Th Floor, Marathon Max Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Building No.2,Lbs Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mulund Goregaon Link Road, Mulund (W),Mumbai-400080 Pan:Aafcs 4633 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri A.K. Nayak- Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Rahul Hakani सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:29.03.2017 लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders,Dated 7/10/2014 & 16/9/2014,Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer(Ao)Has Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Ay.S. As The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical,So,We Are Disposing Them The Same By A Single Common Order.Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Supply Of Avant Grade Pharmaceuticals.The Details Of Dates Of Filing Of Returns, Returned Incomes,Dates Of Assessment Etc. Can Be Summarised As Under: Ay Roi Filed On Returned Income Assessment Date Assessed Income 2009-10 26/09/2009 Rs.4.11 Crores 27/03/2014 Rs.5.18 Crores 2010-11 26/09/2010 Rs.6.04 Crores 23/03/2013 Rs.7.63 Crores 2011-12 26/09/2011 Rs.6.55 Crores 27/03/2014 Rs.8.00 Crores

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Nayak- DR
Section 143Section 148