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)

Rameswar Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 59/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.59/Ctk/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/S Rameswar Agro Industries Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Pvt. Ltd,, Plot No.61/143, Bagwanpur Industrial Estate, Patrapada, Bhubaneswar, Khurda-751019 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr 0805 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/08/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 22.06.2017 Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0010/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Ld. Ar For The Assessee Has Filed An Adjournment Petition Seeking Adjournment On The Ground That Required Papers & Information In The Matter Could Not Be Collected From The Assessee, Which In Our Opinion, Is Not A Plausible One, Accordingly We Reject The Adjournment Petition & Appeal Is Heard Finally. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. For That, The Impugned Order Of Assessment Passed By The Forums Below Are Not Just & Proper Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, As Such The Addition Made Therein Is Liable To Be Deleted In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

ACIT Cir 27(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Amit Rajendra Sheth, Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 755/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.5835/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth Tax Circle-27(1) 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vidyavihar(E) Vs. Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.753/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth Tax Circle-27(1) 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vs. Vidyavihar(E) Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.755/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Tax Circle-27(1) Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vidyavihar(E) Vs. Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P

For Appellant: Kirit Sanghvi, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld.DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

ACIT Cir 27(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Amit Rajendra Sheth, Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 753/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.5835/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth Tax Circle-27(1) 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vidyavihar(E) Vs. Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.753/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth Tax Circle-27(1) 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vs. Vidyavihar(E) Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.755/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Amit Rajendra Sheth 1130/4, Nilgiri Neelkanth Vihar Ii Tax Circle-27(1) Room No.415, 4Th Floor बनाम/ Kurla Terminus Road Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vidyavihar(E) Vs. Mumbai-400 703 Mumbai-400 077 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Avzps-0920-P

For Appellant: Kirit Sanghvi, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld.DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148