Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.243

Section 127(2) falls under section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 243 (Power to transfer cases) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 243 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 127(2) is CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Co. (370 ITR 87), cited in 68 of the 68 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 127(2)

CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Co.
370 ITR 87 · 2015 · High Court
68
citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory, and its non-service or invalidity is not a curable procedural irregularity, rendering subsequent assessment proceedings void. Objections regarding non-service of notice, being a jurisdictional issue, can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal.

CIT v. M/s MT Builders Pvt. Ltd.
349 ITR 271 · 2012 · High Court
21
citing judgments

A notice issued by an Assessing Officer lacking valid jurisdiction over the assessee is invalid. Subsequent proceedings based on such a notice are void ab initio, and cannot be validated by transferring the records or proceedings.

Guru Gobind Singh Educational Society v. CIT
118 ITD 207 · 2009 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
S. K. Industries v. ACIT
141 Taxmann.com 568 · 2022 · High Court
7
citing judgments
CIT v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal
25 Taxmann.com 112 · 2012 · Reported
5
citing judgments
DCIT v. MSPL Ltd.
150 Taxmann.com 44 · Reported
3
citing judgments
Meenakshi Foundation v. PCIT
175 Taxmann.com 990 · 2025 · High Court
3
citing judgments
Drisha Impex (P) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
177 Taxmann.com 808 · 2025 · Supreme Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 127(2)

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kaltech Energies Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2238/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () - Ay 2010-11 - Ay 2013-14

Section 127(2)

Vodafone India Services Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

SCA/14227/2019HC Gujarat26 Aug 2019
Section 127(2)

Tradeswift Broking Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 301/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.301/Kol/2017

For Appellant: Shri Saumitra Choudhury, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rabin Chawdhury, Addl. CIT
Section 127(2)Section 143(2)Section 144

Iona Frances Fergusson, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 35(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 5540/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop
Section 127(2)Section 143(3)

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Mani Exports, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3759/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mani Exports 16(3), Mumbai, Matru Mandir, 1903 Panchratna Opera House, Vs. 2Nd Floor, R. No. 206 Tardeoi Mumbai-400 004 Rd, Mumbai-07 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaefm2320F Revenue By .. Shri Dr. Suman Ratnam, Dr Assessee By .. Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 09-02-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 26-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 127(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 80HSection 880H

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sanjiv Nanda, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1911/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal
Section 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Mr. Sanjeev Nanda, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1850/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal
Section 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

ITO 25(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jewel Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3585/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.5989 & 5990 & 2992/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2002-03 To 2004-05) Pundlik Laxman Masane, Plot Vs. Ito Ward-26(1)(1), No.35, Mahavir Society, Charni Road, Mumbai Malegaon Road, Dhule-424001 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Ablpm 5522 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Keshav Bhujle याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ajay Modi सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/09/2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Dated 14-3-2011, For The Assessment Year 2002-03 To 2004-05, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.144 R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act, By Ito- 26(1)(1), Mumbai. 2. In All These Appeals, The Assessee Had Challenged The Jurisdiction Of Ao-26(1)(1), Who Had Passed Order U/S.144 R.W.S.147 Of I.T. Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. From The Record We Found That Jurisdiction Of The Assessee’S Case For All These Years Lies With The Ito, Dhule, Where He Resides, Having Salary Income Received At Dhule Since Many Years From Bharat Petroleum Corporation. The Assessee Was Also Regularly Filing His Return At Dhule. Thus, The Cit/Ccit Nasik Had The Jurisdiction Over Dhule Area. However, The Cit-26, Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri Keshav BhujleFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Section 127(2)Section 144