← 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)

Sri. Pavan Kandkur, Hubballi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi

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

ITA 522/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Pavan Kandkur Vs Principle Commissioner Of Cts No. 3046, Hirepeth Nagar Income Tax Near Akkikonda Aayakar Bhavan Hubballi 580020 Navanagar Pan – Anipk4256B Hubballi 580025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Balram R. Rao, Adv. Revenue By: Ms. Neera Malmotra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/11/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit, Hubali Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 23.03.2022 For Ay 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Conditions 1. Precedent Being Absent The Proceedings-Initiated U/S.263 Of The Act Was Opposed To Law & The Order Passed U/S.263 Is Liable To Be Cancelled. On The Facts There Being No Error Much Less An Error Prejudicial To The 2. Interest Of Revenue, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax Ought To Have Refrained From Invoking The Provisions Of Sec.263 Of The Act. The Learned Commissioner Ought To Have Considered The Submissions 3. Made By The Appellant & Ought Not To Have Invoked The Proceedings U/S.263 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malmotra, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 5(3)Section 8

case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS for and especially verifying the cash deposits during the demonetization period. Notice under Section 143(2) of the 3 Shri Pavan Kandkur Act was duly served upon the assessee. The AO vide notice under Section 142(1) of the Act called

Mbm Tubes P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5938/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S Mbm Tubes Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito – 5(2)(3) Mohanlal Jain & Co, Ca Mumbai. Office No. 10, Chartered House, Ground Floor, Dr Ch Street, Marine Lines Mumbai – 2. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafcm4177L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Chetan M. Kacha.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.11.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)Cit(A)-9, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal: M/S. Mbm Tubes Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Honble Cit(A) Erred In Treating The Genuine Purchases As Bogus By Taking Peak Credit Of Purchase Parties Listed On Mvat Site As Un Explained Purchases Of Rs.55,80,857/- As Unexplained U/Sec69C Of The It Act & The Reasons Assigned For Doing Are Wrong & Contrary To The Provision Of Income Tax & Rules Made There Under. 2. Your Appellant Crave,Leave To Add,Alter,Amend,Or Modify Any Or All Grounds Of Appeal On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL