← All Phrases

“Section 153(3)(ii)”

Section References (mined)Section 153Section 153(3)(ii)20 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 153(3)(ii) is (ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (3 SCC 57), cited in 131 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 153(3)(ii)

(ii) CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers
3 SCC 57 · 2003 · Reported
131
citing judgments

Courts must reject interpretations that defeat the plain intention of the legislature, even if language is imprecise. A statute must be read as a whole, construing provisions harmoniously to avoid rendering any part otiose or a dead letter.

(ii) Govt. of India v. Citedal Fine Pharmaceuticals
3 SCC 483 · 1989 · Reported
116
citing judgments

The absence of a specific limitation period for recovery of duty or tax does not, by itself, render a rule arbitrary or unconstitutional under Article 14, provided authorities act with expedition and adhere to principles of natural justice.

165 Taxman 95 (Del); (ii) CIT v. Atedhsy Films P. Ltd.
306 ITR 309 · 2008 · High Court
35
citing judgments

A notice is presumed to have been properly served if it is not returned as unserved, and objections regarding non-service are not acceptable in such cases.

Mahindra & Mahindra Limited v. DCIT
24 Taxmann.com 267 · 2012 · Reported
21
citing judgments

Interest paid on debentures until their conversion into shares is considered interest on borrowed money and is subject to TDS provisions. Such interest cannot be treated as dividend.

CIT v. Bhan Textile P. Ltd.
300 ITR 176 · 2008 · High Court
17
citing judgments

When an assessment order is set aside or cancelled, and the Assessing Officer is directed to pass a fresh order, the time limit applicable is usually under section 153(2A) or section 153(3), not section 153(3)(ii) which deals with appeals.

Rajinder Nath v. CIT
135 ITR 5042 · 1982 · High Court
13
citing judgments

A direction contemplated by Section 153(3)(ii) must be an express direction that is necessary for the disposal of the case before the authority or court.

Judgments citing Section 153(3)(ii)

U.P.Cooperative Federationltd, Lucknow vs. ITO-2(3), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 260/LKW/2023[2003-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Dec 2025AY 2003-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.260/Lkw/2023 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2003-04 U.P. Cooperative Federation V. Income Tax Officer-2(3) Ltd Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Pcf Building, 32, Station Road, 57, Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow-226004. Hazratganj, Lucknow- 226001. Pan:Aaaau0373P अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri D. D. Chopra, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Neeraj Kumar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22 09 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 19 12 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri D. D. Chopra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Neeraj Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142Section 142(2)(a)Section 153(2)(a)Section 271Section 80PSection 80P(2)

section 144/ 251/254 of the Act, on 25.8.2014. While passing the above assessment order the Assessing officer has relied upon the provisions of section 153(3)(ii) of the Act where no time limit is prescribed for giving effect to the appellate order whereby the matter has been restored ... paragraph, it is clear that there was a predominant element of 'direction' in this case, as understood in accordance with the provisions of Section 153(3)(ii) for the conduct of a 'special audit'. It is also held that without 'special audit' it will not be possible for the appellant

Jewels Emporium A Legacy, Jaipur vs. ACIT, CC-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1215/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT,Sr.-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Shyam Sunder Gupta, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur

ITA 168/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 150Section 150(1)Section 153(3)(ii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251(2)Section 41(1)

deleted. 3. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in passing an order under section 153(3)(ii) read with section 150(1) directing the AO to make similar additions on account of deemed dividend in A.Y. 2011-12 & A.Y. 2012-13 without giving the assessee

Jaiprakash L. Singh, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 1301/MUM/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250

option and discretion of the Assessing Officer whether or not to take action, it cannot be described as a direction. "Direction" in section 153(3)(ii) of the Act must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case. It must also be a direction which the authority

S.P. Singla Construction Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 514/CHANDI/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153Section 153A

Section 147 squarely applies, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. 18. Learned departmental counsel relied on Section 153(3)(ii) of the Income-tax Act and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. We do not agree ... give effect to any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. 19. A direction or finding as contemplated by Section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

Sri.Parayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan, Calicut vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1), Calicut

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 158/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Judicial

Sri.Parayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan, Calicut vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1), Calicut

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 156/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Judicial

Sri.Parayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan, Calicut vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1), Calicut

In the result, the instant appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasparayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) Kerala Transport Company (Decd., Calicut Vs. Represented By Lrs.) K.T.C. Building, Ymca Calicut 673001 [Pan: Adhpg8318B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150(1)Section 153Section 2(22)(e)Section 268A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member and Shri Manomohan Das, Judicial

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Thiruthuraipoondi Tiruvenkadam Vivekanandam Dhinakaran, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1423/CHNY/2023[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2024AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1422 & 1423/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 1995-96 & 1996-97 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Thiruthuraipoondi Tiruvenkadam Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vivekanandam Dhinakaran, Investigation Building, 5, Iv Street, Venkateswara Nagar, Chennai – 34. Karpagam Gardens, Adyar, Chennai 600 020. [Pan:Abkpd2771Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 06.10.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Years 1995-96 & 1996-97. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, Shri Ttv Dhinakaran Has Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Years 1995 96 & 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 158B

thereby is that assessment is being set aside for de novo assessment and thus, there is no question of application of provisions of section 153(3)(ii) of the Act. 18. Coming back to case laws relied upon by the learned A.R for the assessee. In this regard, the learned

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Thiruthuraipoondi Tiruvenkadam Vivekanandam Dhinakaran, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1422/CHNY/2023[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2024AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1422 & 1423/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 1995-96 & 1996-97 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Thiruthuraipoondi Tiruvenkadam Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Vivekanandam Dhinakaran, Investigation Building, 5, Iv Street, Venkateswara Nagar, Chennai – 34. Karpagam Gardens, Adyar, Chennai 600 020. [Pan:Abkpd2771Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 06.10.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Years 1995-96 & 1996-97. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, Shri Ttv Dhinakaran Has Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Years 1995 96 & 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 158B

thereby is that assessment is being set aside for de novo assessment and thus, there is no question of application of provisions of section 153(3)(ii) of the Act. 18. Coming back to case laws relied upon by the learned A.R for the assessee. In this regard, the learned

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1638/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1637/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1636/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1635/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1634/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1633/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

M/S. A V M Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1632/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

section 147 squarely applied, and the impugned notices were barred by limitation mentioned in the proviso. The revenue relied on section 153(3)(ii ) and submitted that there was no bar of limitation in view of the said provision. There was no merit in such ITA Nos.1632 to 1638/Chny/2023 ... give effect to, any findings of the Tribunal in Boudier Christian's case. A direction or finding as contemplated by section 153(3)(ii) must be a finding necessary for the disposal of a particular case, that is to say, in respect of the particular assessee and in relevance

Shri Krishnaraj Buildhome Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

ITA 753/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Kumar Sharma (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43CSection 50

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “B” JAIPUR श्री संदीDeep गोसाई, न्यायिक

M/S Citi Plaza, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250

direction that the excess should be assessed in the hands of the co-owners. What is a "direction" for the purposes of section 153(3)(ii) of the Act has already been discussed. In any event, what ever else it may amount to, on its very terms, the observation that ... direction. 14. Therefore, in our judgment the order of the AAC contains neither a "finding" nor a "direction" within the meaning of section 153(3)(ii) of the Income-tax Act in consequence of which, or to give effect to which, the impugned assessment proceedings can be said to have

Sri A.M. Abdul Basheer Rahman, Rajapalayam vs. ITO, Ward-2, Virudhunagar

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3008/CHNY/2019[1987-88]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2022AY 1987-88

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji &For Respondent: Shri P.Sajit Kumar, (JCIT)- Ld. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 149Section 150Section 150(1)Section 153(3)(ii)

income under enquiry is taxable in the assessment year under consideration or any other assessment year. As regards the expression "direction" in section 153(3)(ii) of the Act, it is now well settled that it must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case before ... direction which the authority or court is empowered to give while deciding the case before it. The expressions "finding" and "direction" in section 153(3)(ii) is not of the Act must be accordingly confined (sic). Section 153(3)(ii) is not a provision enlarging the jurisdiction of the authority