← 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)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-1), Raipur vs. M/S. Real Ispat & Power Ltd., Raipur

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

ITA 101/RPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 101/Rpr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Real Ispat & Power Ltd. (Central Circle-01), Raipur Vrindavan, Opp. Holy Hearts Schools, Raipur (C.G) Pan No. : Aabcr 9986 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. : Shri G. S. Agarwal, Ca "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Present Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-3, Bhopal Dated 01.09.2021 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. In This Appeal Of Revenue Following Grounds Were Raised. “1. Whether On The Facts & In Law Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 2,57,13,664/- Made By The Ao U/S 14A R.W.S 8D? 2. Any Other Ground May Be Pressed At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Respondent: None
Section 143(2)Section 14A

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद

M/S Svadeshi Enterprise (Hubli), Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)-2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 877/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S Svadeshi Enterprise Vs. Ito 17(3)(2) (Hubli) 12-A, 1St Floor, Mumbai – 400 020 Yusuf Building, Veer Nariman Road, Flora Fountain, Mumbai – 400 023 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aapfs0181B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Tejas Chandarana Respondent By : Harmesh Lal Date Of Hearing 07.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13.06.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi, Dated 15.03.2023 For A.Y. 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Passing The Ex-Parte Order & Thereby Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer The Learned Cit (A) Has Erred In Not Granting Proper Opportunity Of Hearing To The Appellant. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Compensation Paid To M/S. Svadeshi Enterprise (Mumbai) Amounting To Rs.10,00,00,000/-. 3. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Commission & Brokerage Expenses Of Rs.1,12,36,000/- The Appellant Craves Leave To Add To, Amend, Alter Or Delete All Or Any Of The Foregoing Grounds Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Tejas ChandaranaFor Respondent: Harmesh Lal
Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

P a g e | 1 M/s Svadeshi Enterprise Vs. ITO 17(3)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G