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

Smt Revati Narayan Jangam, Mumbai vs. ITO-42(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the Grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8110/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar(Physical Hearing) Smt Revati Narayan Jangam Ito- 42(1)(4), C/506 Shree Complex, Plot No. Vs Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai 106/112, Sector-14 Kamothe, Maharashtra- 400051 Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra- 410210 [Pan: Apipj4676E] Appellant / Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Ms. Harsha Thelasaria, C.A. Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr (Virtually) Date Of Hearing 24.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 04.06.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assesseeis Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) / Nfac Dated 26.09.2025 For Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal; I. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Cit(A)] Erred In Not Admitting The Appeal For The Reason That Appeal Has Been Filed Belatedly. Ii. The Appellant Prays That The Cit(A) Ought To Have Admitted The Appeal & Decided The Grounds On Merits By Considering The Facts Of The Case. Therefore, The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Deserves To Be Set Aside. Iii. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Adjudicating The Action Of Ao In Issuing The Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) & Passing The Order U/S 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act. Iv. The Appellant Submits That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act & Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Is Against The Provision Of The Law, Ultra Vires & Without Jurisdiction; Hence, The Same Shall Be Quashed. Smt. Revati Narayan Jangam

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

Shyam Lal Agrawal HUF, Jharsuguda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Jharsuguda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 335/CTK/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Jun 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.335/Ctk/2026 (धििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Shyam Lal Agrawal Huf Vs Ito, Ward-2, Jharsuguda 1, Bagdehi, Jharsuguda-768204 Pan No. : Aaphs 0093 A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) धििााररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate राजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03/06/2026 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/06/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Perbench: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Appeal No.Nfac/2012- 13/10065011 Order Dated 15/12/2025 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Shri Mohit Sheth, Ld. Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Delayed By 32 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Object To Condone The Same. Accordingly, Considering The Contents Of The Affidavit Filed By The Assessee In Regard To Condonation Of Delay Which Are Not Found To Be False, We Condone The Delay Of 32 Days In Filing The Appeal & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147