← All Phrases

“Section 143(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(2)17,209 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(2) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(2)

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

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).

Judgments citing Section 143(2)

Shri P. Chinnadurai, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai

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

ITA 984/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.984/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sri P. Chinnadurai, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 23, Railway Colony 2Nd Street, Income Tax, Nelson Manickam Road, Metha Nagar, Central Circle 1(3), Chennai 600 029. Chennai. [Pan:Aabpc6070D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Jaya Shree, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Raised 4 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition In Part In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Ms. Jaya Shree, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee on 07.11.2019. The assessee filed return of income declaring total income of ₹.3,47,23,570/-. The Assessing Officer issued notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act calling for certain details and in response to which, the assessee was represented by Authorized Representative and filed

Govindarajan Allam Bala, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 1(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1272/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1272/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Govindarajan Allam Bala, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No. 149, 2Nd Floor, Non Corporate Ward 1(2), Kodambakkam High Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aftpg2676Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 701 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

admitting income of ₹.16,08,070/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and issued notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 14.08.2018. Subsequently, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 06.08.2019 & 04.11.2019 were issued to the assessee calling for details. According to the Assessing

Ramesh Mangilal, Kolathur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Non Corp Ward 10(3), Nungambakkam

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

ITA 1050/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1050/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ramesh Mangilal, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 8, Ayyappa Nagar Extension, Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Vinayagapuram, Kolathur, Chennai. Chennai 600 099. [Pan:Agvpr4889B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Arihanth Jain, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 3 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri Arihanth Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

Assessing 3 I.T.A. No.1050/Chny/25 Officer made it clear at par 4 of the assessment order that issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act is not possible since the minimum required time to issue and serve notice on the assessee is not available for the reason that

C-2573 Dhamalerimuthur Paccs Ltd., Tirupattur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

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

ITA 1035/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1035/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 C-2573 Dhamalerimuthur Paccs Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 188/2, Dhamalerimuthur, Ward 1, Tirupattur, 635 853. Vellore. [Pan:Aabad1030D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jainendar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Raised 9 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer Under 2

For Appellant: Shri Jainendar, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80P(2)(c)

return of income declaring total income of ₹.0. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS and notice under section 143(2) of the Act dated 29.06.2021 was issued on the assessee. Various notices under section 142(1) of the Act as well as various show

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Jayaraj Jaison, Tirunelveli

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2512/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2512/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Assistant Commissioner Of Jayaraj Jaison, Income Tax, Vs. No.9/10, Prop: Jaison Bkery, Central Circle -2, Madurai. Kavalkinaru, Tirunelveli – 625 002. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan:Akgpj-2821-E] (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman,C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 30.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai (‘Ld.Cit(A)’ In Short), Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 30.09.2022 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ In Short) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Madurai (‘Ao’ In Short), For The Assessment Year (‘Ay’ In Short) 2020-21. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. R. Venkata Raman,C.A
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68Section 69

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र