#section 143(2)
Log in to FollowLatest section 143(2) updates, provisions, case laws, compliance requirements, tax implications and expert analysis under Income-tax law on TaxGuru.

Unexplained investment addition in one co-owner unsustainable if no addition in other co-owners

Mere proving identity of creditor is insufficient, genuineness of transaction is also to be proved

There cannot be second round of Section 271(1)(b) penalty for same default

Income generated cannot be held bogus only based on modus operandi

Order passed on non-existing entity is liable to be quashed

Addition of sales reversal entry as unexplained expenditure is unjustified

ITAT quashes Order as AO completing Income Tax Assessment not issued section 143(2) notice

Addition u/s 69 sustained as no evidence produced to prove source of cash deposit

Revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 not invocable merely because PCIT may entertain different view

ITAT directs CIT(A) to examine if mandatory notice u/s 143(2) was issued by AO before issue of reassessment order

Rent including service tax paid for the business purpose is allowable u/s 30

Addition u/s 69C merely because assessee dealt with suspected scrips is unsustainable

Disallowance of short term capital loss merely based on information from investigation wing is unsustainable

Addition unsustainable as identity and creditworthiness of investor company duly proved
Explore the latest section 143(2) updates on TaxGuru, including relevant Income-tax Act provisions, rules, notifications, circulars, judicial decisions and compliance guidance. The coverage highlights important tax positions, procedural requirements, assessments, deductions, penalties and litigation developments to help taxpayers and professionals understand the practical implications of changes in income-tax law.
