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)

Shri Biswajit Dasbagal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 366/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Biswajit Dasbagal Income Tax Officer, Ward-26(2), 60/31, Mahndra Banerjee Road Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700060 [Pan : Amrpb2238E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Bansal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Datta, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 11/07/2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 220 Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance/Additions Of Expenditure & Sundry Debtors Made By The Assessing Officer At Rs. 12,94,939/-. The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Datta, Sr. D/R
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 44A

M/S Krishilakshmi Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Burdwan

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

ITA 605/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 605/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Krishilakshmi Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Vill.- Hatgobindapur Vs 1(2), Kolkata Dist.- Burdwan Pincode - 713407 [Pan : Aaeck1877C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - Burdwan (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Cit(A)”], Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 25/01/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Ld. C.I.T.(A) On 25.01.2019 Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 2. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.207,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Share Application Money With Share Premium By Wrongly Treating The Same As Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Which Is Completely Arbitrary, Unjustified & Illegal. 3. For That On The Facts Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Ought To Have Considered That The Assessee Company Had Discharged Its Onus By Furnishing All The Relevant Documents In Connection With The Share Capital Raised & Also Proved The Identity, Creditworthiness Of The Share Application And

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 250Section 68

Urbanedge Hotel and Holdings Private Limited, Neelankarai, Chennai vs. Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 490/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.490/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Urbanedge Hotels & Holdings Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, No. 129, Estate Main Income Tax, Road, Perungudi, Chennai 600 004. Corporate Circle 3(1), [Pan:Aaacu9790L] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 13.02.2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 06.10.2018 Declaring Total Loss At ₹.6,71,99,134/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Through Cass & Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[“Act” In Short] Was Issued. After Considering The Submissions, The 2

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S Cigfillimited, Chennai vs. ADIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 132/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.132/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Cigfil Limited, Vs. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant 37, Armenian Street, Parrys, Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Chennai 600 001. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. [Pan:Aaacc3120C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.04.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 19.12.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 On 21.10.2018 Declaring Total Income Of ₹. Nil (Current Year Loss ₹.21,39,354/-) & The Same Was 2

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68