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)

Krypton Industries Limited, Falta vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1186/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1186/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Krypton Industries Ltd.…………………..……..…………………....Appellant Plot 31 & 32, Sector-1, Falta, 24 North Parganas, W.B – 743504. [Pan: Aabck0868N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata……………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala & Vidhi Ladia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 31, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Kolkata, Dated 31.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Information Was Received From The Investigation Wing, Kolkata, Indicating That The Assessee-Company Had Taken Bogus Purchases From One Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh To Reduce Its Taxable Income. A Search Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On The Said Person & His Statement Was Recorded. Based On The Appraisal Report & Material Found During The Search, It Was Alleged That The Assessee Was One Of The Beneficiaries Of Such Bogus

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

Tapan Kumar Shaw, Naihati vs. ITO, Ward 51(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1171/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1171/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Tapan Kr. Shaw………….………..……..…………………....Appellant 331, R.B. C Road, Gorifa, Naihati, W.B 743166 [Pan: Bvups8924F] Vs. Ito, Ward-51(3), Kolkata…………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ranu Biswas, Acit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 30, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, Dated 08.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2015–16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2015–16 Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,64,330. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Primarily Due To High Cash In Hand Shown In The Balance Sheet As Compared To The Preceding Year & Late Filing Of Return After 07.11.2016. The Assessee Is Engaged In Trading Business. Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued. The Authorized Representative Appeared & Submitted Various Documents During Assessment Proceedings. During The Course Of Assessment, It Was

Section 143(3)Section 69

Binod Kumar Burnwal, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Durgapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1154/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1154/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Binod Kumar Burnwal…….……...……..…………………....Appellant C/O Ghanashyam Burnwal, Banagram, Nutandanga, Gogla, Burdwan – 713383. [Pan: Aizpb0692A] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Durgapur…………………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Tiwari, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 29, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.03.2025 Passed By The Nfac [In Short Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,89,094, Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass With Prior Approval Of The Competent Authority. Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued, But There Was No Compliance From The Assessee Or His Authorised Representative. In The Absence Of Proper Books Of Account Or Supporting Documents, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Collected Copies Of Audited Financial Statements From The Assessee’S Chartered Accountant. It Was Observed That During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 250