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

Logeswaran Srinivasan, Namakkal vs. ITO Ward 1 Salem, Salem

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

ITA 230/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.230/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Logeswaran Srinivasan, The Income Tax Officer, 18B Palipalayamteachers Colony, Vs. Ward-1(1), Komarapalayam Teachers Salem. Colony, Pallipalayamagraharam S.O., Pallipalaiyam Agraharam Namakkal – 638 008. [Pan: Hznps-6186-J] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Ts Lakshmi Venkataraman, Ca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.04.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.06.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Dated 05.08.2025, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year (A.Y) 2022-23 Against The Reassessment Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Passed By The Ao, Dated 21.03.2024. 2. At The Threshold, We Observe That There Is A Delay Of 81 Days In The Filing Of The Present Appeal By The Assessee. The Assessee Has Furnished An :-2-: Ita. No.230/Chny/2026

For Appellant: Mr. TS Lakshmi Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)

Kali Charan Sharma, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, New Delhi

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

ITA 3105/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Kali Charan Sharma Vs Assessment Unit Of It F-193, Hari Nagar Extension, Department Jaitpur South, Delhi-110044. Delhi Pan-Apgps7066F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Lokesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.03.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Nfac/2017-18110228536 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 03.03.2023 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed His Return Of Income On 11.02.2019 At Inr 85,69,430/- Which Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act Wherein Delayed Payment Of Pf/Esi Was Added Back. Based On The Information Flagged As Per Risk Management Strategy On Itba Portal That Assessee Has Made Purchase From 02 Parties Namely, M/S. Mjk Trading Pvt. Ltd. Of Inr 22,97,551/-And From M/S. Omido Trading Pvt. Ltd. Of Inr 27,22,968/- Which Were Bogus Entities Providing Fake Input Tax Credit Under Gst Act Therefore, The Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened U/S 147 Of The Act & Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 28.04.2022. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee, The Ao Held That The Purchases Made From These Two Parties As Bogus & Made The Addition Of Inr 50,20,519/- & Accordingly, Total Income Of The Assessee Was Assessed At Inr 1,35,89,949/- & Levy The Tax On The Agricultural Income Of Inr 67,50,000/-.

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250