← 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)

Arvind Durlabhji Jogia, Porbandar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees (ITA No

ITA 264/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 264/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Arvind Durlabhji Jogia The Pr. Commissioner Of Vs. Ashapura Jewells, Kirti Mandir Income Tax, Jamnagar Income Tax Office, 4Th Floor Road, Porbandar Manek Centre, Nehru Road, Jamnagar - 361008 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Accpj0313M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.265/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Parekh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 115Section 115BSection 127(2)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

Watershed Organisation Trust, Ahmednagar vs. ACIT Exemption Circle, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1976/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 May 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.D. KudvaFor Respondent: Shri Mallikarjun Utture
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “बी” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA

M/S Abhman Distributor Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1410/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

procedure. 5.1 Another argument taken by the Ld. AR was that as the return was filed on 18.06.2020, the notice under section 143(2) of the Act should have been issued within 6 months i.e. by 30.09.2020, but the same was issued on 16 December 2021 and was therefore, invalid ... paper book filed before us. The Ld. DR submitted that neither the issue of validity of the notice under section 143 (2) nor relating to the approval under section 151 of the Act was raised before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the same were opposed to be raised before

Nisha Baheti, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1199/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Nisha Baheti C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Acit, Cir-11(2), Advocates 2, Garstin Place, Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Chowringhee Square, Vs. Hare Street, Kolkata-700001, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahmpb0320M Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Roma Chaudhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Roma Chaudhary, DR
Section 10(38)Section 127(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM Nisha

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal f

ITA 2600/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.R. Clement Ramesh
Section 2Section 35

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’"यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Rekha Modi, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4559/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Rekha Modi Vs. Jcit Central Circle -1 E-380, First Floor, Greater Noida Kailash Part-I, New Delhi Pan No.Aaepm8105E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 153DSection 156Section 69A

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH

Rai Innotech Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-19(1), Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4508/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Sh. Sachin Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

very fair in having tabulated all the notices issued to the assessee in his assessment order wherein there is not even mention of section 143(2) process’s compliance. 4. The above being the clinching factual position, I hereby quote ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon ... quash impugned assessment itself on account of the learned Assessing Officer’s failure to issue section 143(2) notice which has been held as a mandatory compliance in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision. Ordered accordingly. 5. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 6. This assessee

Shri Dinesh Man Singh, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- II, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 587/LKW/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow01 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Dinesh Man Singh Dcit Central Circle-Ii V. Shri Kanchan Khanna, 15/45- Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, B, Civil Lines, Kanpur-208001. Allenganj, Kanpur- 208001. Pan:Acqpm1819H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vikas Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

M/S Steel Strips Infrastructures Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 732/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 732 /Chd/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s Steel Strips Ltd. बनाम The Asst. CIT Central Circle-II Chandigarh SCO 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACCS5077J प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent अपीलार्थी/Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A, Ms. Muska Garg, C.A राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hea

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muska Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(i)Section 37(1)

income for Assessment Year 2014-15 declaring a loss of Rs. 29,35,475/-. The case was selected under CASS, and notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were duly issued. During the assessment proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee had claimed

Shree Samprat Coop Hsg Soc Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 470/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Shrivastav, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 57

return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 03.11.2017 declaring total income at Rs.Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) followed by notice under section 142(1) was issued. However, despite repeated notices and reminders, there was minimal compliance by the assessee during assessment

Karm Gas Service, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(7) Presently the ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1252/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Anil N. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 69A

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

The DCIT Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ram Agri Infra Structure India Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA No. 1733/Ahd/2019 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objection no

ITA 1733/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member

Sandeep Kumar Gupta, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 29(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sandeep Kr. Gupta ……………...……………………………..….……….Appellant 27/H/2, Gobra Gorasthan Road, Kolkata – 46. [Pan: Agspg8435F] Vs. Ito, Ward-29(1), Kolkata……..............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Indranil Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 01, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 21.11.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 336 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.7,63,000/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy

Apurva Natvar Parikh & Co. Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai-6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 2646/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

Number of Return of Income Date of processing u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act. Date of service of Notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act Date(s) of issue of Notice(s) under section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act Order passed under

B.N. Exports, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 20(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 1123/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanm/S B. N. Exports Vs. Acit Range 20(1), Nightingale Chs, Bldg No. 2, Flat Piramal Chambers, Parel, No. 201, Second Floor, Hindustan Mumbai. Naka, Charkop Rd, Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aaafb1156E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR

Venetian Ldf Projects LLP, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3534/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Venetian Ldf Projects Vs. Acit, Llp, Circle-4(1), 83 Avenue, Sector-83, Gurgaon Vill.- Sihi, Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aajfv6462C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Sh. Ankit Kumar, Adv. Department By Sh. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01.05.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm These Assessee’S Twin Appeals

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

ACIT, Circle -4(1), Gurgaon, dated 26.12.2016 and 26.12.2017, are non-est in the eyes of law since not preceded by a valid section 143(2) notice issued by the competent authority. The Revenue’s case on the other hand is that the learned Assessing Officer had indeed issued ... section 143(2) notices dated 29.08.2015 and 29.07.2016, assessment year-wise; respectively, and, therefore, we need to uphold the same. And that the assessee’s foregoing additional ground(s) to this effect deserves to be rejected. 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and Revenue

Shri Nidhi Credit Co-Oprative Society Limited, Rajkot vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 936/RJT/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Shr Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.936/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri J.R. Mankodi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

ITA No.936/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 14-15 Sh.Nidhi Credit Co-Op Society Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Karuna Jain, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 2(1), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 190/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT, Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 250Section 250(6)

test of fair hearing has not been satisfied in their individual cases. In all the cases, the assessees have been issued notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) they have been directed to furnish the documents, the assessee have complied with the directions, appeared before the Assessing Officer

Mohammad Ahatehsham, Raebareli vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 438/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

notice issued under section 148, the assessee filed a return of income on 16.05.2022, admitting taxable income of Rs.2,98,560/-. Notice under section 143(2) was generated and issued to the assessee on 17.10.2022. Thereafter, the ld. AO records that he issued as many as three notices under section

Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer, Bareilly

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

ITA 729/LKW/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2009-10 Mr Pawan Kumar Singh V. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1) 848, Tilak Colony, Subhash Nagar, Bareilly (Up). Bareilly. Pan:Ccrps4435G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 22 04 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 04 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY