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)

Jose Salvador Bemvindo Fernandes, Cuncolim, Goa vs. Income Tax Officer, W-1, Margao, Goa

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

ITA 56/PAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.56/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) Jose Salvador Bemvindo Ito-Ward-1, Vs Fernandes, Blessings Pioneer . Voddy, Cuncolim, Complex, Salcete-403703, Old Market, Goa. Margoa, Goa-403601. Pan/Gir No. Abjpf7713K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Narcinva Lotlikar.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 07.07.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale ,Jm: The Assesse Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Nfac/Cit(A) Delhi Passed U/Sec147 R.W.S144B & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, It Was Found That There Is A Delay Of 45 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal & The Assesse Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay. Whereas, The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & Sufficient Cause Was Explained & The Ld. Dr Has No Specific Objections. Accordingly, We Condone The 2 Ita. No.56/Pan/2025 Jose Salvador Bemvindo Fernandes. Delay & Admit The Appeal. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Ex-Parte Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer.

Section 144

Navnitbhai Jerambhai Desai, Surat vs. ITO, Ward- 3(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 136/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.136/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Navnitbhai Jerambhai Desai Income Tax Officer 44, Vaikunthdham Society, Vs. Ward No.3(2)(1), Surat, Laxmikant Aashram Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Katargam, Surat-395 004 Gate, Surat-395 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afzpp 3076 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (प्र"थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, ‘The Act’) Dated 13.12.2024 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, ‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao’) U/S 144 Of The Act Dated 26.11.2019. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.13,68,000/- On Account Of Unexplained Income U/S 69A R.W.S. 115Bbe.

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 69A