“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)

Swastik Vegetable Oil Products Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle - 2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1102/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Swastik Vegetable Oil Products Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1101/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Sgd Pharma India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 477/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita-Tp Nos.130 & 447/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/S. Sgd Pharma India Vs. Dy.Cit/I.T.O Private Limited, Ward/Circle 3 (1) Mahabubnagar Hyderabad Pan:Aadcc7815K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. K. Haritha, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 43BSection 92C

declaring a loss of Rs.2,21,78,327/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny, and accordingly, a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee. In view of the involvement of international transactions with the Associated Page

Sgd Pharma India Private Limited, Mahabubnagar vs. DCIT, Circle -3 (1), Hyderabad

ITA 130/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita-Tp Nos.130 & 447/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/S. Sgd Pharma India Vs. Dy.Cit/I.T.O Private Limited, Mahabubnagar Pan:Aadcc7815K (Appellant) Ward/Circle 3 (1) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Smt. K. Haritha, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 21/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: Both These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Sgd Pharma India Private Limited (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Final Assessment Orders Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Read With Sections 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act") Dated 25.02.2022 & 27.07.2022 For A.Y 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively In Pursuance Of The Directions Issued By The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (“Ld. Drp”). Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Two Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 40A(7)Section 43BSection 92C

DCIT, CC-1(4), Kolkata vs. Jupiter International Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1678/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata ………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Jupiter International Limited..……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Unnayanam, 20A, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue, Kol-19.. [Pan: Aaacj6956B] Appearances By: Shri P. N Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Nandini Sureka, Advocate, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue With A Delay Of 197 Days & The Revenue Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of The Delay. After Going Over The Said Petition, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind The Delay & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

assessee company filed its return of income on 03.07.2015 declaring a total loss of Rs. 5,22,63,140. Subsequently, notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and the assessee duly complied with and assessment order under section 153A w.r.to 143

Anupam Guha, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer 25(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1665/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2020-21 Anupam Guha….…………..……..……….………….……….……….……Appellant 5/17 Regent Park, Kol- 700040.. [Pan: Agjpg0760G] Vs. Ito, Ward-25(1), Kolkata…………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manoj Kumar Patil, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.11.2024 Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020–21. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 174 Days & The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. After Going Over The Said Affidavit, We Find Sufficient Reasons Behind The Delay & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 250Section 56(2)(x)

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

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

page 89 of the paper 4 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 book and submits that the Assessing Officer, vide notice dated 22.06.2021 under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act furnished only issues as per the reasons recorded for reopening stating that “to invoke provisions of section 2 ... provided a copy of reasons recorded during the course of hearing, which is different from the reasons provided in the notice under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. He argued vehemently that failing to provide a copy of actual reasons recorded depriving the assessee to object

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,

ITA 1669/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

page 89 of the paper 4 LTA. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chiny/24 book and submits that the Assessing Officer, vide notice dated 22.06.2021 under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act furnished only issues as per the reasons recorded for reopening stating that “to invoke provisions of section 2 ... provided a copy of reasons recorded during the course of hearing, which is different from the reasons provided in the notice under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. He argued vehemently that failing to provide a copy of actual reasons recorded depriving the assessee to object

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

ITA 1667/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

proceedings. He drew our attention to page 89 of the paper book and submits that the Assessing Officer, vide notice dated 22.06.2021 under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act furnished only issues as per the reasons recorded for reopening stating that “to invoke provisions of section 2 ... provided a copy of reasons recorded during the course of hearing, which is different from the reasons provided in the notice under section 143(2) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. He argued vehemently that failing to provide a copy of actual reasons recorded depriving the assessee to object

Kshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7401/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarkshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit- Circle 210, Mogra Village, Old 2(1)(1), Nagardas Road, Mumbai- Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 400069 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aabck8174D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Vishwas Mehendale Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 270A(9)(a)

return of income for the year under consideration. 4. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) dated 12.09.2018 was issued. The 3 Kshitij Interiors Pvt. Ltd assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1)(2), Mumbai

Jigar Bharat Sheth (Legal Heir of Late Shri Bharat Kumar Manilal Sheth ), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7317/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethjigar Bharat Sheth (Legal Heir Of Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(1)(2), Late Shri Bharatkumar Manilal Mumbai. Tower No. 6, 4Th Floor, 407, Vashi, Sheth). 43, Savani Apartment, 8Th Floor, Navi Mumbai-400703. M.G. Road, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400077. Pan/Gir No:Aedps3883E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Nilesh Kariya Respondent By Shri Kavitha Kaushik (Sr Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 159Section 250Section 54F

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI ‘F’ BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Sahyadri Agencies Limited, Moothedath House Arikanniyur

ITA 4257/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

I.T.A. No. 4257/Mum/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI GIRISH

Deepak Kumar Yadav, Rewari vs. ITO, Rewari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8579/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2020-21 Sh. Deepak Kumar Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Village-Kapriwas, Ward-2, Rewari, Dharuhera, Haryana Rewari-123401 Pan: Abrpy2885R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

issues, namely refund claim and winning from 2 | P a g e Lottery/crossword puzzle/horse races. The Ld. Assessing Officer ("AO") served notice under section 143(2) upon the assessee on 22.09.2019 followed by issue of notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 23.11.2020. The Ld. AO completed ... against which SLP stands dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This is not so. During assessment proceedings in response to notice under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act, with reference to specific query on receipt of interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition Act, the assessee

DCIT, Delhi vs. Alaka Mars Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 8517/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, Delhi

Assertive Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 3(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4200/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194Section 250Section 40

ITA No.4200/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI

M/S. South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Circle-24(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarm/S. South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 24 (1), Plot No.6, 4Th Floor, Sector 44, New Delhi. Gurugram – 122 003 (Haryana). (Pan : Aakcs3608R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I.P. Bansal, Advocate Shri Vivek Bansal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2026 Date Of Order : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit (A)”, For Short] Dated 17.06.2025 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Issues Involved In The Present Appeal Are Squarely Covered By Various Decisions & He Heavily Relied Upon The Decision Of The Coordinate Bench In The Case Of Real Innerspring Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit (2025) 174

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 131(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘G’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

New Star System Solution Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-18(2), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 3585/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

supersession of the earlier instructions and shall be applicable with effect from 1-4-2011.” In the instant case, the notice under section 143(2) of the Act stood issued to the assessee on 12.04.2016 by ITO Ward 27(4), Delhi. In July, 2016, the ITO transferred the jurisdiction ... memo is enclosed in page 5 of the paper book. After the transfer of jurisdiction from ITO to DCIT, no fresh notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued by ACIT, Circle 4(1), Gurgaon. The assessment was ultimately framed under section 143