← 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)

Kashinath Tapuriah, Kolkata vs. ACIT- CC - 2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 5008/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Kashinath Tapuriah Acit-Cc-2, Mumbai 9, Rowdown Street, Udyanchal Bldg., Flat No. 20, 5Th Floor, Kolkata, Vs. Karnataka – 700017. Pan/Gir No. Abupt5665K (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : None : Shri. P. D. Chougule, Sr. Dr. Respondent By : 19.02.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 47, Mumbai (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2011-12. 2. As There Was No Representation On Behalf Of The Assessee Inspite Of Several Opportunities, We Hereby Proceed To Dispose Off This Appeal By Hearing The Learned Departmental Representative (‘Ld. Dr’ For Short) & On Perusal Of The Materials Available On Record. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.41,345 Business Expenditure. Kashinath Tapuriah

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 19.02.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM Kashinath

Fazal Husain, Nand Nagri vs. ITO, Delhi

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

ITA 5633/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Fazal Husain, Vs Ito, E-1/424, Nand Nagri, Ward 59(7), Delhi – 110 093. Delhi. Pan: Absph4524R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Fazal Husain (Assessee In Person) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 Order Per Vimal Kumar, Jm: This Appeal By The Appellant Assessee Is Against The Order Dated 07.10.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) In Appeal Arising Out Of The Order Dated 09.12.2019 U/S 143(1) Of The Act Of The Ito, Ward-59(7), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Ao’), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee E-Filed The Return Of Income On 09.02.2018 Declaring An Income Of Rs.3,81,580/-. The Case Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny Under Cass For The Reason Of Verifying The Cash Deposit During The Demonetization Period. Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued. Notices U/S 142(1) Of The Act Along With Questionnaire Were Issued To The Assessee To Draw Details. However, The Assessee Did Not File Any Reply. As Per Sft Reported, The Assessee Deposited A Cash Of Rs.58,80,600/- In His Bank Account During The Demonetization Period, I.E., From 09.11.2016 To 31.12.2016. The Appellant- Assessee Was Given Final Show Cause Notice Dated 03.12.2019. The Assessee Neither Appeared Nor Filed Any Documents. On Completion Of Proceedings, The Ld. Ao, Vide Order Dated 9Th December, 2019, Made Additions Of Rs.58,80,600/- & Rs.1,48,500. Against This Order Dated 09.12.2019, The Appellant Assessee Filed Appeal Before The Ld.Cit(A), Which Was Dismissed.

For Appellant: Shri Fazal Husain (Assessee in person)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL