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)

Jks Abasan LLP, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 594/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2017-18 Jks Abasan Llp…………….....……..………………….……….……….……Appellant P-4, Black Lanen, Kol-700012. [Pan: Aalfj9634N] Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata..…...……...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 29, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 24, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.03.2025 Of The Nfac, Delhi Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2017–18. 2. At The Very Outset, The Assessee Has Challenged By Taking Legal Ground That Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Dated 21.08.2018 Is Not In Conformity With The Instruction Issued By Cbdt Instruction No.1/2011 Dated 31.01.2011 & Since The Notice Issued U/S 143(2) Is Defective, The Assessment Order Is Void & Fit To Be Quashed. The Ld. Counsel Further Submits That Since Legal Issue Goes To The Root Of The Matter, Therefore, The Same May Be Admitted For Adjudication. After Considering The Facts Of Jks Abasan Llp The Case & Keeping In View The Decisions Of The Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Case Of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd V. Cit [1998] 229 Itr 383, We Are Inclined To Admit The Legal Ground For Adjudication.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

Fabtech, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 30(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 198/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2015-16 Fabtech……………...…….....……..………………….……….……….……Appellant 102A, Ballygunge Place, Kol-700019. [Pan: Aadff1311L] Vs. Ito, Ward-30(1), Kolkata…...……...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Aditya Bikram, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 04, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 24, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.11.2024 Of The Nfac, Delhi Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2015– 16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Income Tax Return For The Year Under Consideration Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.4,27,000/-. The Case Of The Assessee Is Selected For Scrutiny & Accordingly Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued & In Response, The Ar Of The Assessee Appeared & Filed Relevant Documents & Submissions. The Assessing Officer Found That The Submissions Of The Assessee Are Not Tenable & An Amount Of Rs.98,83,992/- Which Is Alleged To Be Received During The Financial Year 2014-15 From Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Ltd. Disallowed & Added Back To The Income Of The Assessee. Fabtech 3. Aggrieved By The Said Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Cit(A) Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 143(2)Section 250