← 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)

Rakesh Divedi, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 43(6), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3290/DEL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalrakesh Divedi, Income Tax Officer, 87, Triveni Apartments, Ward-43(6), Delhi. Pitampura, New Delhi - Vs. 110034. Pan-Apcpd9179A (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Pranshu Singhal, Ca Assessee By & Ms. Mansi Jain, Adv. Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2026 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ In Short) Dated 07.03.2025 In Appeal No.40/10204/2018-19 Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(3) U/S 143(3) Of The Act (‘The Act’ For Short) Dated 20.12.2016 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is An Individual & Proprietor Of M/S Triambkay Gauri Impex. The Information Was Received By The Ao From Investigation Wing That There Were Cash Deposits In The Bank Account Of The Assesse With Icici Bank, However, Income Of The Assessee & Gross Receipt Has Not Rakesh Divedi Vs. Income Tax Officer Commensurate With The Cash So Deposited, Therefore, After Recording The Reason U/S 147, Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 31.03.2016 After Obtaining Statutory Approval From The Pcit. Thereafter, Assessment Was Completed Vide Order Dated 20.12.2016 Wherein Total Addition Of Rs. 5,20,88,345/- Was Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Cash Deposited In The Bank Accounts By Holding The Same As Unexplained Cash Credits. 3. Against The Said Order, Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Before Ld. Cit(A) Who Vide Impugned Order Has Partly Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee & Directed The Ao To Make Addition Of Peak Credit Of The Total Deposits In The Bank Accounts.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sirsi vs. Shri Bhooteshwar Pattina Sahakari Sangha Niyamitha, Sirsi

The appeal of the revenue is DISMISSED as withdrawn

ITA 305/PAN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji08 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. Ita No. 305/Pan/2025 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Income Tax Officer Ward-(1), Sirsi. . . . . . . . Appellant बिधम / V/S Shri Bhooteshwar Pattina Sahakari Sangh Niyamita Cp Bazar, Opp. Union Bank, Sirsi, Sirsi - 581401 Pan : Aauas5459A . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: None For The Assessee Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 08/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Instituted U/S 253(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ In Short] Challenges The Order Dt. 21/05/2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ In Short] Which In Turn Arisen From The Regular Assessment Order Dt. 22/09/2022 Passed U/S 143(2) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ In Short] For Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’ In Short]

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Ganesh Ram Dokania, Banka vs. ACIT, Cir-2, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Years: 2014-15 Ganesh Ram Dokania………..……..………………….……….……….……Appellant Dokania Market, Aliganj, Bihar-813102.. [Pan: Aadfg1795P] Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Patna…….………...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Rastogi, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 08, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.03.2025 Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (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 2014–15. 2. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In Real Estate Business & The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 15.11.2016 In Response To Notice U/S 153A Of The Act By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.31,56,350/-. Notice U/S. 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued & Subsequently, Assessment U/S. 153A/144 Was Completed At A Total Income Of Rs.25,67,79,232/- Wherein The Assessing Officer Imposed Penalty U/S. 271Aab Of The Act At Rs. 1,60,00,000/- On Undisclosed Income.

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri

West Bengal Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 50(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2298/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2018-19 West Bengal Co-Operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd….……….……Appellant Lb-2, Sector-Iii, Salt Lake City, Kol – 700106.. [Pan: Aaaaw0454H] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(1), Kolkata.…………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri I. Banerjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 08, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.10.2024 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 2018–19. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 286 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay, Which Is Self-Explanatory. After Going Over The Said Affidavit, We Find That The Delay Was Occurred Due To Unusual Circumstances Which Was Beyond The Control Of The Assessee & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 80P

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

Tonmoy Sadhukhan, Bhangar vs. ITO, Ward 25(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2291/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2017-18 Tonmoy Sadhukhan…………..……..………………….……….……….……Appellant Ghatakpukur, Gobindapur Bhangar, South 24 Parganas 743502, Wb – 743502. [Pan: Cbzps8992R] Vs. Ito, Ward-25(1), Kolkata…………………………..…….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri P. K. Rai, Adv, H. Mukhopadhaya & Trideep Nayak, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 08, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.02.2024 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 2017–18. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 528 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay, Which Is Self-Explanatory. After Going Over The Said Affidavit, We Find That The Delay Was Occurred Due To Unusual Circumstances Which Was Beyond The Control Of The Assessee & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

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

Satya Subhas Ghoshal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 28(2) Presently 30(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1988/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Satya Subhas Ghoshal………..……..………………….……….……….……Appellant 49/1, Karl Marx Sarani, Kol – 700023. [Pan: Aenpg8374C] Vs. Ito, Ward-28(2), Presently Ward-30(1), Kolkata……….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Kr. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 10, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 08, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.03.2024 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 2016–17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income Was Filed Showing Total Income Of Rs.3,39,860/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessing Officer Issued Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. It Was Also Found That The Assessee Had Deposited Cash Of Rs.1,03,86,425/-In Saving Bank Account In Indusind Bank (Rs. 30,56,625/-) & Icici Bank (Rs. 73,29,800/-). As There No Explanation & No Requisite Documents Were Provided By The Assessee To Verify The Source Of Such Cash Deposits, The Assessing Officer Added The Entire Sum Of Rs. 1,03,86,425/- U/S 68 Of The Act. Satya Subhas Ghoshal 3. Aggrieved By The Said Order, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) Wherein The Appeal Has Been Dismissed By Holding That The Assessee Failed To File Any Credible Evidence In Support Of The Claim.

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

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

Shriram Finance Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT, Chennai

ITA 2043/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2043/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23 Shriram Finance Limited, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of [Since Shriram City Union Finance Income Tax – 3, Limited Amalgamated With Shriram Chennai. Transport Finance Co. Limited & Presently Known As Shriram Finance Limited], Sri Towers, Plot No. 14A, South Phase, Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aaacs7018R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.05.2025 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – 3, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2022-23 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234DSection 263Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 4

referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.(supra), notice under section 143(2) of the Act for the A.Y. 2012-13 was issued on 26.09.2013 in the case of the amalgamating entity only after the date ... position of law before initiating the impugned notice. 12. In the case of Maruti Suzuki (India) Limited, it was observed that notice under Section 143(2) of the IT Act, 1961 under which jurisdiction was assumed by the Assessing Officer, was issued to the amalgamating company. This was held