Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(2) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 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 143(2) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 13,613 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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. 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.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
193 ITR 321 · 1992 · Supreme Court
1,695
citing judgments

The principle of consistency applies in tax matters, meaning a fundamental aspect found to be true in one assessment year should not be changed in a subsequent year if the order was not challenged.

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.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,596
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,569
citing judgments

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.
367 ITR 466 · 2014 · Supreme Court
1,558
citing judgments

Taxing statutes are presumed to operate prospectively unless a clear contrary intention for retrospective application is evident. The law applicable for determining tax liability is that which stands on the first day of the assessment year, following the principle that law looks forward, not backward (lex prospicit non respicit).

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

Judgments on Section 143(2)

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 42(1), Murshidabad vs. Abhoy Kumar Jain, Aurangabad, Jangipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2022/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2022/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Ito Ward-42(1), Murshidabad Vs Abhoy Kumar Jain, 39, R.N.Tagore Road, Berhampur, Murshidabad Pan No. :Acopj 2370 E (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj, Sr.Dr निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 01.07.2025 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Sr. Dr That The Ld.Cit(A) Has Quashed The Assessment, Insofar As He Has Held That Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Was Not In Compliance With The Instruction Issued By The Cbdt In Instruction No. 1/2011 [F. No. 187/12/2010-It(A-I)], Dated 31- 1-2011. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Has Not Intimated This Defect Before The Assessing Officer In Line With The Provisions Of Section 124(3) Of The Act. It Was The Prayer That The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A) Be Reversed & That Of The Ld.Ao Be Restored. 3. We Have Considered The Rival Submissions & Perused The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A). A Perusal Of The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Shows That The Ld.

For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj, Sr.DR
Section 124(3)Section 143Section 143(2)

Jams Builsers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle 4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITSSA 12/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmait(Ss)A No.12/Kol/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Jams Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Cc-4(2), Kolkata Alom House, 7B Pretoria Street, Kol-71. Pan No. : Aaacj7205R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri A K Tibrewal, Fca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P N Barnwal, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : This Appeal By The Revenue Arises Against The Order Dated 18.11.2024 Of The Cit(A)-27, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Fact Of The Case Are That The Assessee Originally Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139 Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Declaring Total Income Of ₹5,11,180. A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted In The Case Of The Jhunjhunwala Group At Various Premises In Kolkata. During The Course Of Search & Survey, Certain Books Of Accounts, Cash & Jewellery Were Found & Seized From The Business Premises Of Different Concerns Of The Group. In Pursuant To The Search, The Assessee’S Case Was Centralized With The 2 It(Ss)A No.12/Kol/2025

For Appellant: Shri A K Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P N Barnwal, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 68