Almost every filed return produces one of these, and most people never read it. An intimation under this provision is not a scrutiny notice and not an allegation — it is the outcome of automated processing, telling you what the department's system made of the return you filed. There are three possible outcomes: your figures were accepted and nothing changes, a refund is due, or a demand has been raised because the system adjusted something. It is the third that matters, because the adjustments are made without anybody asking you first, and the window to contest one is short. A deduction disallowed here quietly becomes a demand that accrues interest while you are not looking.
A Intimation after Processing (Section 143(1)) is generated for a defined set of reasons rather than at random. The ones we see most often are these.
The processing provision is long known as Section 143(1), and the intimation is commonly called a 143(1) intimation regardless of the Act under which it was issued. The Income-tax Act, 2025 renumbered the Act, so newer intimations may cite a different number for the same processing power. What has not changed is the limited nature of it: processing may correct errors that are apparent, reconcile against information the department already holds, and disallow claims that fail a condition visible on the face of the return. It may not substitute a judgement about whether your business expenses were reasonable. If your intimation reads as though somebody has formed a view about your affairs, check whether it is in fact a different kind of notice.
Processing must be completed within nine months from the end of the financial year in which the return was filed, so an intimation can arrive many months after you file and its absence early on means nothing. Where a demand is raised you generally have 30 days to respond — by paying, by disagreeing on the portal, or by filing a rectification. Interest runs on an unpaid demand from the outset, so a demand you intend to dispute should still be responded to promptly rather than left. If you genuinely do nothing, the demand stands, can be adjusted against a future refund, and recovery action becomes available.
The intimation itself carries no penalty. What it carries is a demand, and interest on that demand runs regardless of whether you agree with it. An unpaid demand does not go away: it is adjusted against future refunds, appears against your record, and can be followed by recovery proceedings. Where the underlying issue is a genuine understatement rather than a processing artefact, leaving it can also invite a closer look at the same year. Respond within the 30 days even if the response is "I disagree, and here is why".
Fake tax notices circulate constantly by email and SMS, and they are convincing enough that people pay them. The department does not ask for payment to a personal account, does not demand immediate transfer to avoid arrest, and does not send a payment link by SMS. Every genuine communication carries a document identification number, and that number can be checked on the income tax portal before you act on anything. The safest habit is never to follow a link in a message at all: open the portal yourself, log in, and look under e-Proceedings. A real notice will be there. If it is not on the portal, it is not a notice — whatever the letterhead says.
The same applies to telephone calls. Assessment in most cases is now faceless, which means the officer handling your file does not know who you are and has no reason to telephone you. Anybody who calls claiming to be from the department, asks for one-time passwords, or offers to settle a demand informally, is not from the department. If you are unsure whether something is genuine, the cost of checking is a two-minute login.
Non-residents receive these notices too, often for years in which they believed nothing was taxable in India, and being abroad changes the practicalities rather than the obligation. Everything is done on the portal, so no travel is required, but two things commonly go wrong. The first is access: the registered email and mobile number on the portal are frequently the ones held when the person left India, and a notice arrives at an address nobody reads. Update the contact details on the portal before you need them. The second is verification — a response that is not verified is not a response, and the verification routes available to a non-resident are narrower. Establish which one works for you in advance rather than discovering the problem on the last day of a deadline.
Where the notice relates to a year governed by the earlier Act, the section number on it will follow the law as it stood when the notice was issued. That is not a defect and it does not make the notice invalid. Read what the notice says it concerns rather than trying to match the number against the current Act.
People assume a response ends the matter, and usually it does — but the closure is rarely announced. Once a reply is filed the item moves out of your pending list on the portal and, in most cases, nothing further is heard. That silence is the normal outcome and it is not something to chase. What you should do is keep your own record: the acknowledgement of the response, the date it was filed, and the documents you relied on. Two years later, if the same year is reopened on a different ground, that file is the difference between a short letter and a long argument.
Where the response is not accepted, you will be told. The department may ask a follow-up question, issue a further notice on the same year, or — where a demand was involved — simply leave it standing. The important thing is to watch the portal rather than your inbox. Email delivery fails, addresses go stale, and spam filters are unforgiving; the portal is the authoritative record of what has been issued to you and what is outstanding against you. Logging in once a month takes two minutes and is the single most effective piece of tax hygiene available to anyone who has ever received a notice.
One thing worth understanding is that responding to one notice does not immunise the year against another. Processing, scrutiny selection and reassessment are separate mechanisms operating on separate timelines, and an intimation resolved in March says nothing about whether the same year is selected for examination in November. Nor does it work the other way: a year that has been examined and closed is generally protected, but only on the grounds actually considered. Keeping the underlying records for the statutory retention period, rather than only until the immediate question goes away, is what makes the next enquiry cheap.
We reply to income tax notices for individuals and businesses across India, entirely online. Assessment is largely faceless, so the officer handling your file may be anywhere — which means your own location no longer limits who can represent you.
Andhra Pradesh · Arunachal Pradesh · Assam · Bihar · Chhattisgarh · Goa · Gujarat · Haryana · Himachal Pradesh · Jharkhand · Karnataka · Kerala · Madhya Pradesh · Maharashtra · Manipur · Meghalaya · Mizoram · Nagaland · Odisha · Punjab · Rajasthan · Sikkim · Tamil Nadu · Telangana · Tripura · Uttar Pradesh · Uttarakhand · West Bengal · Delhi · Jammu & Kashmir · Puducherry · Chandigarh · Ladakh · Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu · Andaman & Nicobar Islands · Lakshadweep
Not in the sense people fear. It is the result of automated processing and most of them simply confirm that your return was accepted as filed. It becomes something to act on only where it raises a demand or changes a refund. The reason to open every one is that you cannot tell which kind you have received without looking, and the clock on a demand starts whether or not you read it.
Almost always a mismatch with what your employer reported. Processing compares the deductions in your return with the employer's statement and the information the department holds. If you claimed a deduction directly in your return that was not in your Form 16 — because you submitted the proof late, or after the employer closed its statement, or not at all — the system sees a claim it cannot corroborate and disallows it. The claim may be perfectly valid. The fix is a rectification with the supporting proof, not a fresh return.
Three common causes. The claim exceeded the statutory limit for that section, which is apparent from the return itself. Or the deduction is one that requires the return to be filed by the due date, and it was filed late — several deductions are conditional on timely filing and this catches people who file in December. Or the claim was not reflected in the employer's statement or the information available to the department. Identify which of the three applies before responding, because the answer is different in each case.
A world of difference. The intimation is automated processing with limited, mechanical adjustments. A notice under the scrutiny provision means your return has been selected for examination and an officer will ask questions about your income, your claims and your documents. The first is routine and usually resolved online in an afternoon; the second is a proceeding. People conflate them because the numbers are adjacent, and then either panic at an intimation or under-react to a scrutiny notice.
By checking the portal rather than the message. Every genuine communication carries a document identification number that can be verified on the income tax portal, and every real notice appears under e-Proceedings when you log in yourself. A message that is not on the portal is not a notice, whatever the letterhead. The tells are consistent: a payment link in an SMS, a demand for transfer to a personal or unfamiliar account, a threat of immediate arrest, or a request for a one-time password. The department does none of these, and because assessment is largely faceless the officer handling your file has no reason to telephone you at all. Never follow the link — open the portal yourself.
Nine months from the end of the financial year in which the return was filed. So a return filed in July can produce an intimation the following year, and its absence in the meantime tells you nothing. If no intimation is issued within that period, the return as filed is generally taken to be the processing outcome.
Usually a challan that has not been mapped to the demand — the payment exists but the system has not matched it. Respond to the outstanding demand on the portal selecting that the demand has already been paid, and give the challan details: the challan identification number, date, amount and the assessment year. Check that the assessment year on the challan is right, because paying against the wrong year is the single most common reason a paid demand keeps reappearing.
No charge for reading it and telling you where you stand. If it needs a reply, we will quote before doing anything.
💬 Send your notice on WhatsAppLeave your number — our team calls you back. Free, no obligation.
EaseValue