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)

Indira Kumari, Ranchi vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ranchi

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

ITA 376/RAN/2025[23-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2023-24 Indira Kumari……………………………………………….……...Appellant Priyadarshi Academy Bajpayee Path, Hinoo Ranchi, Jharkhand-834001 [Pan: Akopk1488L] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi……………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances By: None, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 15, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 17, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.08.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is An Individual Filed Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.6,95,160/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass On Account Of Large Investment In Bonds, Debentures Vis-À-Vis Return Of Income Claim Of Deduction U/S 54F Of The Act. During The Assessment Proceedings, Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued. However, Assessee Only Partially Complied With Said Notices. In View Of The Non-Compliance, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Complete The Assessment U/S 144 Of The Indira Kumari Act. The Ld. Ao Made The Addition On Account Of Long-Term Capital Gain Of Rs.1,86,89,102/-, Disallowance Of Deduction Claim Under Chapter Via Of Rs.1,68,921/-. Accordingly, The Income Of Assessee Was Assessed At Rs.1,95,53,183/-.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 54F

Pawan Kumar Poddar, Jamshedpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Jamshedpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to payment of cost of Rs

ITA 374/RAN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22 Pawan Kumar Poddar……………………………………………...Appellant C.H Area, Road No.13 Sonari, Jamshedpur Jharkhand-831011 [Pan: Abjpp6962C] Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Jamshedpur…………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances By: Shri Nitin Kr. Pasari, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 15, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 17, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.03.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Assessee Filed Return Of Income Declaring Income Of Rs.9,92,630/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass Primarily To Examine Relating To Cash Deposit. Accordingly, Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Furnished Certain Details, However, The Same Were Found To Be Unsatisfactory. Accordingly, The Assessing Officer Further Observed Assessee Had Long Term Capital Gain Arising From Sale Of Immovable Pawan Kumar Poddar Property, However, No Proper Explanation Of Supporting Documents Were Furnished, In Response To Specific Queries Raised By The Assessing Officer. In Absence Of Satisfactory Explanation, The Assessing Officer Treated The Cash Deposit Of Rs.31,47,000/- As Unexplained Cash & Also Made Addition In Respect Of Ltcg Amounting To Rs.21,78,069/-. Accordingly, Total Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Rs.63,17,700/-.

Section 143(2)Section 250

K P Automobiles Private Limited, Ranchi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(A), Ranchi

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

ITA 303/RAN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Apr 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2023-24 K P Automobiles Private Limited………………………………………...Appellant 510, Industrial Area Kokar, Ranchi Jharkhand-834001 [Pan: Aafck0101N] Vs. Cit(A), Ranchi…….………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances By: Shri Manjeet Verma, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 15, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 17, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.08.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass Primarily To Examine Issues Relating To Low Net Profit. Accordingly, Statutory Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. However, Assessee Failed To Comply With The Notices Issued During The Assessment Proceedings. In View Of Non-Compliance, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Complete The Assessment U/S 144 Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessing Officer Observed That Unexplained Cash Credit Amounting To Rs.47,14,000/- Which Were K P Automobiles Private Limited Not Satisfactorily Explained By The Assessee. Accordingly, The Assessing Officer Treated The Said Amount As Unexplained Income & Completed The Assessment By Determining The Total Income At Rs.1,44,97,923/- As Against The Return Income.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 250