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)

Tc Forex Services Limited (Formerly Tata Capital Forex Limited), Mumbai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 913/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.913/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Tc Forex Services Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of [Formerly Tata Capital Forex Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3(1), Limited], One Fobres House, 411, Wanaparthy Block, Aayakar Dr. B.V. Gandhi Marg, Fort Mumbai, Bhavan, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Maharashtra 400 001. Road, Nungambakkam, [Pan:Aacct6156D] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2022 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)-7, Chennai Dated 31.01.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Declaring A Loss Of ₹.4,61,59,836/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notice Under Section 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 03.09.2015 Was Served On The 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 144

Dy CIT, Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Jefferies India P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 457/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.457/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit, Cir 4(3)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Jefferies India Pvt. Ltd. Room No.649, 6Th Floor, 42 & 43, 2 North Avenue, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400020. 400051. & Cross Objection No.151/Mum/2021 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 457/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Jefferies India Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Cir 4(3)(1) Room No.649, 6Th Floor, 42 & 43, 2 North Avenue, Vs. Bandra-Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Bandra (E), Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400020. 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj7850R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma Assessee By: Shri M.P. Lohia/Nikhil Tiwari सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal As Well As Cross-Objection Against The Order Dated 05.02.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-22, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2014-15. C.O. No.151/Mum/2021 A.Y.2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia/Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 143(2)Section 145(1)

Sameer Khan`, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 128/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.128/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-16) Sameer Khan, Vs. Acit, Visakhapatnam-1. Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam Pan: Auhps 9016 R (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent : Sri Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr By सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of : 09/03/2022 Hearing घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 07/04/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr. Cit, Visakhapatnam-1 Vide Din & Letter No.Itba/Com/F/17/2020/1032080706(1), Dated 31/3/2021 For The Ay 2015-16. 2 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Wholesale Trading Of Iron & Iron Scrap. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Ay 2015-16 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 28,29,930/- On 28/09/2015. Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices U/S. 143(2) & 142(1) Were Served On The Assessee. In Response To The Notices The Asessee’S Representative Appeared & Filed The Details Required By The Ld. Ao. The Ld. Ao After Examination Of The Books Of Accounts & Other Details Called For, Completed The Assessment By Adding Rs. 1,14,000/- As Interest Income From The Unsecured Loans Not Declared By The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri Murthy Naik, CIT-DR by
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263