Section 144B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.273

Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 273 (Faceless Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 273 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 144B is Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT (243 ITR 83), cited in 2,943 of the 10,521 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 144B

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. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · Supreme Court
1,656
citing judgments

Appealing a tax assessment requires more than just filing the appeal; it involves actively pursuing it. The assessee must effectively engage with the appellate process.

CIT v. Max India Ltd.
295 ITR 282 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,162
citing judgments

Under Section 263, an assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue merely because the Principal Commissioner disagrees with the Assessing Officer's (AO) view, particularly if the AO has adopted one of two permissible views in law, unless that view is completely unsustainable. If due inquiries were made, the AO's order does not become erroneous solely because the fact of inquiries was not recorded.

CIT v. Gabriel India Ltd.
203 ITR 108 · 1993 · High Court
990
citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment order under Section 263 merely because they hold a different opinion or believe a deeper inquiry was warranted if the Assessing Officer has applied their mind and conducted some inquiry. Revision under Section 263 is permissible only in cases of a complete lack of inquiry or non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer, not for merely inadequate inquiry.

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal
469 ITR 46 · 2024 · Supreme Court
713
citing judgments

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

Rampyari Devi Saraogi v. CIT
67 ITR 84 · 1968 · Supreme Court
616
citing judgments

An assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interests if the Assessing Officer accepts a sum offered as income by an assessee, even when that sum was not actually earned, thereby allowing revision under Section 263.

Gee Vee Enterprises v. Addl. CIT
99 ITR 375 · 1975 · High Court
543
citing judgments

An assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue if the Assessing Officer fails to make proper inquiries before accepting the assessee's statements or claims. The Commissioner can revise such an order under Section 263 without conducting further inquiries himself.

Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Cooperative Ltd. v. ITO
230 Taxmann 309 · 2015 · High Court
527
citing judgments

A cooperative society is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) if it is engaged in cooperative activities. It also clarifies the allowability of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) for interest income received from investments made in cooperative banks, after duly considering the Supreme Court's decision in Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
444 ITR 1 · 2022 · Supreme Court
524
citing judgments

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

Judgments on Section 144B

Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Morbi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 197/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Venish Vinodray Lalani, The Income-Tax Officer, Ward- Prop. Of Nandini Sarees Ghar, 1, Aayakar Vibhag, J. K. Vs. 4, Rup Complex, University Chamber, Lalpar, National Road, Opp. Ramraj Travels, Highway, Morbi – 363642, Rajkot – 360005, Gujarat Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aflpl9689Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 30.12.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 11.03.2024. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre Has Erred In Law & Facts In Dismissing The Grounds Raised In Appeal Venish Vinodray Lalani

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1000/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1000/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2022-23 ] Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Soham, 2B-9, Ganesh Park-1, Income Tax Office, 5Th Floor, New Vs. Near Mama Saheb Temple, Raiya Aayakar Bhawan, Rajkot, Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360007 Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Asgpj4670B (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am : Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2022-23, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 19.05.2026 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Dated 02.02.2024. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee, In This Appeal, Is That Assessing Officer Disallowed, Loss From House Property Of Rs. 2,00,000/-, The Deduction Of Rs. 1,50,000/- Under Section 80C & A Specific Amount Of Deduction Of Rs. 13,437/- Under Section 80D Of The Act. That Is, Assessing Officer Finalized The

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80CSection 80D

Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs. CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 658/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 658 & 485/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2022-23 ] Nitinbhai Nanlal Badani, Cit (Appeals), National Vs. Nirav, Gandhi Gram Main Road, Faceless Appeal Centre, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Delhi, New Delhi 110001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Achpb0250C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2022-23, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S. 147 Of The Act. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical Therefore These Two Appeals Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 485/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 658 & 485/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2022-23 ] Nitinbhai Nanlal Badani, Cit (Appeals), National Vs. Nirav, Gandhi Gram Main Road, Faceless Appeal Centre, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Delhi, New Delhi 110001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Achpb0250C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2022-23, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S. 147 Of The Act. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical Therefore These Two Appeals Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

Infra Developers, Shivpuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ashoknagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 454/AGR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15 Infra Developers, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Narendra Nagar, Shivpuri (Mp)- Ashoknagar (Mp)-473331 473551 Pan :Aabfi5834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Sharma, Advocate & Shri Manuj Sharma, Advocate Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2026 Order Per : Brajesh Kumar Singh: This Appeal Is Directed Against The Impugned Order Dated 26.03.2026 Passed In Appeal No. Nfac/2013-14/10151758 By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)] U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) For The A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed Assessee’S Appeal. 2. In This Case, The Original Assessment U/S. 143(3) Was Completed On 14.07.2016, Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 9,50,000/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.8,46,040/-. Subsequently, The Assessment Was Reopened Vide Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act Dated 30.03.2021 On The Ground That The Assessee Had Made Payment Exceeding Rs. 20,000/- In Cash In One Day Amounting To Rs. 20,19,400/- In Violation Of Section 40A (3) Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 250Section 40ASection 40A(3)