Section 2 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 2 is National Thermal Power Corporation v. CIT (367 ITR 85), cited in 62 of the 29 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2

National Thermal Power Corporation v. CIT
367 ITR 85 · 2014 · High Court
62
citing judgments

An assessee can raise a new claim or ground for the first time before an appellate authority or the Tribunal, even if no revised return was filed, provided the claim was legally available and the necessary facts are on record or can be examined. Such a claim, if available in law, cannot be shut out merely due to inadvertence or an erroneous belief of a complex legal position.

Bombay in Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. v. CIT
93 Taxmann.com 63 · 2018 · High Court
53
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot make a prima facie adjustment to the total income under Section 143(1)(a) if the adjustment involves a debatable issue.

PCIT v. Krishi Rasayan Exports (P.) Ltd. and (ii)
145 Taxmann.com 191 · 2022 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bikaner v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti
69 Taxmann.com 425 · 2016 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Pathapati Subba Reddy v. Special Deputy Collector (LA)
2024 SCC OnLine SC 513 · 2024 · Reported
3
citing judgments
Avada Trading vs. ACIT 284 ITR (A.T.) 73 (Mum) (v). Bechtel International Inc. v. ADIT
50 SOT 433 · 2012 · ITAT
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. DEVI SINGH, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed being devoid of any

ITA 20/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 271(1)(c)

MITSUI KINZOKU COMPONENTS PVT LTD,REWARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD TWO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3911/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 115Section 143(3)Section 237Section 239

ALLIANCE BOOKS SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,,COOCHBEHAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1),, JALPAIGURI

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

ITA 566/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Alliance Books Suppliers Pvt. Acit, Circle 2(1) Ltd. Central Revenue Building, Race Khagrabari North, P.S. Kotwali Course Road, Jalpaiguri, Vs. Area Sardar, Coochbehar, West Bengal-735101 West Bengal-736101 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadca1168P Assessee By : Shri Pranaved Sarkar, Advocate For Saumitro Chaudhry, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Pranaved Sarkar, Advocate for Saumitro Chaudhry, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Sr. DR
Section 132(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

HEMCHAND CHINTAMAN PATIL,THANE vs. ITO, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 6320/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Omkareshwar Chidarahemchand Chintaman Patil, Vs. Income Tax Officer 202, Lovely Palace No.2, Qureshi Mansion, Kharigaon, B. P. Road, 2Nd Floor, Gokhale Bhayander (East), Road, Naupada, Teen Thane - 401105. Haath Naka, Thane (W), Thane – 400602. Pan/Gir No. Amapp3180E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. Dr.)

Section 249Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250

ITO, WARD-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ALEX TRADECOM PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2197/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2197 & 2198/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata…………..…………………………….…….……Appellant Vs. Alex Tradecom Pvt. Ltd…………..……………….………...……...…..…..Respondent 4, Ratan Sarkar Garden Street, Burrabazar, Kol- 700069. [Pan: Aajca6146P] Appearances By: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Against Separate Orders Dated 05.08.2024 & 26.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue With Delays Of 38 Days. The Revenue Has Filed Separate Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid And

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

MANJAR DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST,RAJKOT vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 164/RJT/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Oct 2025AY 2024-25
Section 143(1)Section 164Section 244A

DCIT AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA, AKOLA vs. THE AKOLA JANATA COMMERCIAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., AKOLA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 189/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154

KEEZHUPARAMBA SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,MALAPPURAM vs. ITO WARD 2, TIRUR

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 568/COCH/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan PFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 80P

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 28, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. MANOJ KUMAR SINGH, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and consequently, the appeal

ITA 3717/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Manoj Kumar Singh, Vs Dcit, S-17, Ground Floor, Central Circle-28, Panchsheel Enclave, Delhi. New Delhi - 110 017. Pan: Aaxps2824H Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra &For Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131(3)Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

SHYAM METALICS AMD ENERGY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1074/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Shyam Metalics & Engery Ltd…...………..............................……….……Appellant 83, Trinity Tower, 7Th Floor, Topsia, Kol-700046, [Pan: Aahcs5842A] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 15, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.04.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 22, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Section 250Section 68

SAKSHI ROONGTA BENEFIT TRUST,RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), KOTA

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 385/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 154

SATISH NARAYAN TARALE,BELGAVI vs. INTL.TAXATION WARD, PANAJI

ITA 55/PAN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 055/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Satish Narayan Tarale 35, Laxmi Narayan Niwas, 2Nd Stage, Hanuman Nagar, Belgaum-590001. Pan : Afkpt0032Q . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Challenges Din & Order No Itba/Ast/F/144/2024- 25/1072202908(1) Dt. 15/01/2025 Passed By The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] U/S 144 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Anent To Assessment Year 2019-20 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 253(6)Section 3Section 4Section 6(6)Section 69A

KARAM VIR YADAV,GURGAON vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAC

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2605/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmakaramvir Yadav, Vs. Assessing Officer, 1135, Sector 46, Nfac, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Abipy5863E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ranjan Chopra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 29.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2020-21 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Assessee Company, 1961. 2. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr. Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Act, So Much So That, The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Do Not Satisfy The Statutory Twin Conditions Prescribed Under Section 263 Of The Act, Viz., (I) That The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Visakhapatnamportauthority Vs. Theasst.Cit -Circle-1(1) Administrative Office Building 4 Th Floor, Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530001 Mvp Road, Beside Post Office Andhra Pradesh-530001. Sector-8, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam – 530017 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.103/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Dy.Cit Vs. Visakhapatnamportauthority Room No. 412, 4 Th Floor Administrative Office Building Prathyakshkar Bhavan Port Area, Visakhapatnam 530035 Mvp Double Road Andhra Pradesh Opp. Rythubazar Visakhapatnam – 530014 [Pan:Aaalv0035C] Andhrapradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)

DISTRICT PROBATION & AFTER CARE ASSOCIATION SATARA,SATARA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD1(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2607/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 261/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar & Chaitanya
Section 112Section 194CSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 50

ABHYUDAYA CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD TURBHE BRANCH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the 20 appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2575/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. Vaze, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Aditya M. Rai, Sr. DR
Section 194ASection 194A(3)(v)Section 201(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

NIRAV TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2987/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year : 2021-22 Nirav Trust, Deputy Commissioner Of 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Bajaj Bhawan, Vs. Circle-17(1), Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Kautilya Bhavan, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400021. Pan : Aactn7869E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.A. Gohel For Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui Date Of Hearing : 17-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-06-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-4, Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 25-03-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri M.A. GohelFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 143(1)Section 208Section 234CSection 234C(1)

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

ITA 1037/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, बनाम / Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Nani, Daman-396 210 Vs. Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement | 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 147Section 250

M/S G.D. TAMBI & SONS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 176/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal for assessment year 2015-16 in

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 24

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2