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)

Pranab Kumar Banik, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Centre Circle-II, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on ground No

ITA 373/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.373/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-2008) Pranab Kumar Banik, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-Ii, C/O- Salarpuria Jajodia & Co Aaykar Bhavan, Purva, 7, Chittaranjan Avenue, 110,Shantipally, Kolkata Kolkata-700072 Kolkata-700107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adqpb 4401 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.Jhajharia, Fca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Bani Brata Dutta,Adl.Cit-(Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2007-2008, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.258/Cc-Ii/Cit(A)C-Iii/2008-09/Kolkata, Dated 31.12.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 147/144 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 31.12.2008. 2. Brief Facts Qua The Assessee Are That In The Case Of Assessee A Search & Seizure Operation Was Conducted At The Residential Premises Of Shri Pranab Kumar Banik At 25, Dumdum Park, Kolkata-700055 & The Office Of The Ajanta Group Of Companies & Its Directors. The Assessee Is A Director Of M/S Ajanta Footcare (India) Pvt. Ltd., One Of The Main Companies Of The Ajanta Group & A Partner In The Association Of 2 Pranab Kumar Banik

For Appellant: Shri S.Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Bani Brata Dutta,Adl.CIT-(DR)
Section 139(9)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Emerald Company Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O Ward II(I), Kolkata

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

ITA 2214/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2214/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-10) Emerald Company Ltd Vs. Ito Ward 11(1), P-7 As The Bond Company Ltd Chowringhee Square, Merged Into Emerald Kolkata-700069 Company Ltd. Graphite India Premises, 31 Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aadce2623D .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R. Kothari, Fca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Bani Brata Dutt Addl.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 12/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/04/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Xii Kolkata, In Appeal No. 271/Xii/11(1)/11-12, Dated 14.10.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act,1961 ( Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 29.11.2011. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 On 22.09.2009 Disclosing A Total Income Of Rs.20,02,107/-. The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On Dated 03.11.2010. Later On, The 2 Emerald Company Ltd (The Bond Company Ltd Merged) Assessee`S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S 143(2) Of The Act & Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment By Making Various Additions.

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Bani Brata Dutt Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S. Shiva Rubber Industries, New Delhi vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA is allowed

ITA 2212/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Years 2002-03 Vs. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Shiva Rubber Industries, Ward-2(2), Gurgaon. Hari Nagar, Khandsa Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaefs 7721G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee(S) By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/04/2017 Order This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises From The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-I, Gurgaon, Vide Order Dated 11.02.2015 For The Assessment Year 2002-03. 2. The Assessee Has Raised As Many Eight Grounds Of Appeal, I.E., The Legal Grounds As Well As Grounds On Merit. “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing Impugned Assessment Order Without Assuming Jurisdiction As Per Law & Without Serving The Mandatory Notices Under Sections 142(1), 148 & 143(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing Impugned Assessment Order Without Complying The Mandatory Conditions Of Section 147 To 153 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Reopening Of The Case Is Bad In Law & Beyond The Jurisdiction Of The Ld. Assessing Officer. 3. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer In Framing The Impugned Assessment Being Beyond Jurisdiction, Bad In Law, Illegal, Unjustified, Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Void Ab Initio.” 2

For Respondent: Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(2)

Ramesh Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 850/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Years 2010-11 Ramesh Gupta, Vs. Ito-Ward-36(2), D-48/2, Gali No.5, New New Delhi. Gobind, Pura, Delhi. Pan: Aerpg 1917K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee(S) By : Shri Deepak Suneja, C.A. Revenue By : Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/04/2017 Order This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises From The Order Of Learned Cit(A)- Xix, New Delhi, Vide Order Dated 28Th November, 2014 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised As Many As Six Grounds Of Appeal. The Effective Grounds Are In Fact Three Grounds, I.E., In Ground No.1 There Is Adhoc Disallowance Of Rs.73,875/-, In Ground No.2 Addition In Respect Of Interest Paid Amounting To Rs.4,86,345/- & In Ground No.3 Addition In Respect Of Sundry Creditors Amounting To Rs.2,570,032/-. It Is Pertinent To Reproduce The Order Of The Ao Which In Fact Is Without Application Of Mind & Without Giving Opportunity To The Assessee & Without Making Any Inquiry As Under: “Itr 4 Has Been Filed On 23.09.2010 Declaring Total Income At Rs.679390. Subsequently Notice U/S.143(2) Was Issued & Served Upon As The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny With The Approval Of Ccit, Delhi-Xii & In Response Shri Pramod Kumar Gupta Ca & Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta Ca Attended From Time To Time & Furnished Necessary Details Including P&L A/C, Balance Sheet & Report U/S. 44Ab Of The Act. During The Previous Year The Assessee Was A Wholesale Dealer Of Medicine Under The Name & Style Of Bandhu Medicos. Total 2

For Respondent: Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri
Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 64Section 80C