← 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)

Surya Pratap Singh, Meerut vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Meerut

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

ITA 2064/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyasurya Pratap Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward 2 (5), Ka – 138, Galaxy Ganga, Meerut. Ganga Nagar, Meerut (Uttar Pradesh).

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 54Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surya Pratap Singh

ACIT, Circle- 2, Noida vs. Presidency Infraheights Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6657/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Shiv Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Nath Baranwal, CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 68

restored.” 4. Cross objections by the assessee are as under: “BECAUSE the notice dated 08.04.2016 Rs.43,79,93,8411- issued under section 143(2) by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II(2), Allahabad IS without jurisdiction, therefore assessment order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle ... Noida without assuming jurisdiction by issue of notice under section 143(2) got vitiated and liable to be annulled.” 5. Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. Relevant documentary evidence brought on record duly considered in light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT

Dadi Akhil, Secunderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 3(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 580/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.580/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 ) Shri Dadi Akhil Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Secundrabad Central Circle 3(2) Pan:Ahjpa1911C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 5.9.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2020-21. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.35,88,126/-.

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(2)

ITA 580 of 2023 Dadi Akhil आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad

M/S. Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 320/KOL/2022[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 320/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Unit No. 1501, 15Th Floor Vs Kolkata Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata – 700001 [Pan: Aaaco3479N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/12/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 17/05/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Several Grounds Of Appeal, At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Case Of The Assessee Is Squarely Covered In Favour Of The Assessee By The Decision Of The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Itat In The Assessee’S Own Case For Assessment Year 2009-10, Wherein The Tribunal While Dealing With The Issue, That Whether The Date On Which The Assessing Officer Has Signed The Notice U/S 143(2) Or The Date On Which The Notice Is Actually Sent To The Assessee Via E-Mail, Has To Be Considered For The Purpose Of Determining

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE

Madhu Goyal, Kota vs. ITO Ward, Kota

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

ITA 575/JPR/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: the date of hearing. 3

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 37(1)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Phool Chand Gupta(HUF), 1/90 Vidhyadhar Nagar vs. ITO, WD-4(2), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 393/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Jain (C.A.)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

ara aitcita after, cage =aradis, aayR IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR So Va. Mates, = wees

DCIT, CC 5(2), Central Range -5, Mumbai vs. Manubhai Gems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee is rejected

ITA 659/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram & Sh. Rahul
Section 115JSection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 69A

conducted on the business as well as the residential premises of the assessee's group. The case was centralized and notice under section 143(2) dated 10.09.2020 was duly served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) called on the assessee to furnish various details based on which he concluded

DCIT-1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3913/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2024AY 2014-15
For Respondent: Date
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 154Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA

Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3195/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: us. 2.

For Appellant: Shri P.J. PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 154Section 250

that the Assessing Officer had accepted the revised return as a valid return and has, thereafter, issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. Therefore, we concur with the CIT(A) that, having accepted the revised return as a valid return, the Assessing Officer fell in error in rejecting

Gurjeet Singh, Ladwa vs. ITO, Ward -1, Kurushetra

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

ITA 2726/DEL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 2(14)

best judgment of the AO owing to non compliance of the requirement of Section 142(1) r.w. Section 143(2) of the Act. It is further seen that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine by refusing to condone the delay of almost 790 days

Baba Kishan Dass Education & Charitable Society, Fatehgarh Sahib vs. ITO (Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 467/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250(6)

income declaring NIL income on 28/09/2016 which was subsequently revised on 14/11/2017. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. Notice under section 143(2) was issued and thereafter notice under section 142(1) alongwith questionnaire and thereafter final show cause was issued and in absence of any reply

Jai Trading Company, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-35(2)., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 367/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(2)Section 194H

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’, KOLKATA [Before Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial

Rahul Maheshwari, Jaora, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ratlam

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 267/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14 Rahul Maheshwari, Ito, 111/1, Pathan Toli, Ward 1, बनाम/ Jaora, Ratlam Ratlam Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Atwpm4233A Assessee By Shri Sakar Sharma, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2024

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 145Section 147Section 148Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Jeeri Keerthana Reddy, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward- 19(2)(4), Mumbai

ITA 3224/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran: A.Y : 2017-18 Jeeri Keerthana Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer, 382, 1St Cross Road, Koramangala Ward 19(2)(4), 4Th Block, Bengaluru – 560 008. Mumbai (Respondent) Pan : Allpj0661L (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Smt. Vranda U. Matkari
Section 120Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54

under CASS for limited scrutiny assessment to verify (i) deduction towards Capital Gains, and (ii) investment in immoveable property. Accordingly, a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 04.09.2018, which was duly served on the assessee. In response thereto, the assessee submitted the details online ... jurisdiction with the AO. It is submitted that the CIT(A) ought to have held that the notice issued by the AO under Section 143(2) of the Act and the consequent assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act are without jurisdiction as per the provisions

ACIT - 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Properties Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3002/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharygodrej Properties Ltd. Vs. The Dcit, Circle 14(1)(2) M/S Kalyaniwalla & Room No. 455, 4 Th Floor, Mistry Llp, Esplanade Aayakar Bhavan, House, 2Nd Floor, 29, M.K. Road, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Mumbai – 400 020 For, Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacg3995M Appellant .. Respondent Acit-14(1)(2) Vs. Godrej Properties Ltd, Room No. 455, 4 Th Floor, 5Th Floor, Godrej One, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Pirojshanagar, Estern Road, Mumbai – 400020 Express Highway, Vikroli (E) Mumbai – 400079 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacg3995M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Yasmin Dastur Respondent By : Kishore Dhule Date Of Hearing 28.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2024

For Appellant: Yasmin DasturFor Respondent: Kishore Dhule
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

P a g e | 1 ITA No.2994 & 3002/Mum/2023 Godrej Properties Ltd Vs. The DCIT, Circle 14(1)(2) IN THE

Godrej Properties Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14 (1) (2), Mumbai

ITA 2994/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Yasmin DasturFor Respondent: Kishore Dhule
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

Page 1 ITA No.2994 & 3002/Mum/2023 Godrej Properties Ltd Vs. The DCIT, Circle 14(1)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Lalani Construction Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office 12(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2822/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhlalani Constructions Vs. Ito 12(3)(2) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, Lalani Aura, 7Th Floor, Mumbai 34Th Road, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400050 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacl0768P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Neha Paranjpe Respondent By : Manoj Kumar Sinha Date Of Hearing 09.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2024

For Appellant: Neha ParanjpeFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36

P a g e | 1 Lalani Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO-12(3)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Platinum Properties, Raigad vs. ITO Ward 5, Panvel

In the result, the ground no

ITA 2681/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhplatinum Properties Vs. Ito, Ward-5 Plot No. 6, G-20-24, Panvel, Taloja, Midc, Tal Panvel, Thane Taloja Raigad-410208 Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aajfp4159N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Prateek Jain Respondent By : H.M. Bhatt Date Of Hearing 05.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.01.2024

For Appellant: Prateek JainFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43B

P a g e | 1 Platinum Properties Vs. ITO, Ward-5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Sh. Lachhman Dass Bansal, Barnala vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 34/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69Section 69A

duly sworn affidavit. Thereafter the assessee filed his return of income on 26/09/2018 which was processed under section 143(1) thereafter notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) alongiwth questionnaire were issued. Thereafter, after considering the submissions filed by the assessee but not finding the same acceptable

The Jagadhri Co-Operative Marketing Cum Processing Society Ltd., Jagadhri vs. The Pr.CIT, Panchkula

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 210/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

during the course of assessment proceedings. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the notice dt. 22/09/2019 issued under section 143(2) and the response filed by the assessee dt. 04/10/2019, subsequent notice dt. 07/12/2020 issued under section 142(1) and the response filed by the assessee dt. 20/12/2020