← All Phrases

“Section 143(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 143Section 143(3)45,044 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 143(3) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 143(3)

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

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. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Judgments citing Section 143(3)

Walwa Panchayat Samittee Salary Earners Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd, Islampur vs. ITO Ward 5, Sangli, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3064/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3064/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Walwa Panchayat Samittee V The Income Tax Officer, Salarayearners Sahakari S Ward-5, Sangli. Patsanstha Ltd., Urun Islampur, Sangli – 415409. Pan: Aaaaw0459L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 27/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2021-22 dated 19.08.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, dated 09.12.2022. ITA No.3064/PUN/2025 [A] Delay : 1.1 There was a delay of 40 days in filing appeal

Biramane Education Foundation, Satara, Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward 1(1), Pune, Maharashtra

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2945/PUN/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Kiran Sanmane, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vishwajit Shinde, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 40Section 58

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.2945/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year

Shri Sai Aniruddha Education Society, Ratnagiri vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

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

ITA 2661/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2661/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 10Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2661/PUN/2025

Soni Somani Infrastructure, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1, Pune

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

ITA 2458/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2458/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Soni Somani Infrastructure, Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Solapur. 560/31, South Sadar Bazar, Vinayak Nagar, Solapur- 413003. Pan : Abvfs4209B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shriniwas G. Bhutada Shri Vishnu D. Bhutada Revenue By : Smt. Sailee Dhole Date Of Hearing : 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.08.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “Based On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Appellant Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Under Section 253(1)(A) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The 'Act'), Against The Order Dated 27Th Aug 2025 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order') Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- Nfac

For Appellant: Shri Shriniwas G. BhutadaFor Respondent: Smt. Sailee Dhole
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

Ameetsingh Ajitsingh Rajpal, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 5, Pune

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

ITA 2390/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2390/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2021-22 Ameetsingh Ajitsingh Dcit Circle-5, Pune Rajpal, 479, Eden Villa, Rasta Peth, Vs. Kasba Peth, Pune Maharashtra Pan-Aaqpr3148E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "ए "न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD

Aurangabad Steel Corporation, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(5), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 2054/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vishwajit Shinde
Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.2054/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year

Yogesh Jagannath Satav, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), Pune

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

ITA 2022/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2022/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Yogesh Jagannath Satav, The Income Tax Officer, Fadai Chowk, Nagar Road, Ward – 12(4), Pune Wagholi, Taluka-Haveli, Vs. Pune-412207 Pan : Bbtps3761B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Digambar Surwase Department By : Shri Manish Mehta Date Of Hearing : 20-01-2026 Date Of 28-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.06.2025 Of The Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai [“Addl./Jcit(A)”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) (National Faceless Assessment Centre) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of Appellant Even Though Form-5 Under Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Was Not Issued The Appellant By Jurisdictional Commissioner Of Income Tax. The Appellant Prays That Appeal May Be Restored Back To File To Of Cit(A) For Hearing The Appeal On Merits. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Passed Under Section 250 By Cit(A) Nfac, Delhi Dismissing The Appeal Is Wholly Illegal, Unlawful & Against The Principal Of Natural Justice. The Appellant Prays For Just, Fair & Appropriate Relief. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Cit(A) Nfac Erred In Not Passing A Speaking Order On The Grounds Raised By The Appellant Before Nafc. The Appellant Prays For Just, Fair & Appropriate Relief. 4. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellant Prays That Appeal Deemed To Be Withdrawn, May Be Revived.

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

income of the appellant. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by learned AO under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and void ab intio as the order is passed / issued without following ... CBDT. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the learned AO under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and void ab intio as the communication framed contrary to the CBDT Circular

ITO, Ward-2(1), Pune vs. Bharatnagar Buildcon LLP, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1891/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Junnar Taluka Prathamik Shikshak Sahakari Pathsantha, Pune vs. Pne-W-59(1), Pune

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

ITA 1659/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1659/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2021-22 Junnar Taluka Prathamik Pne-W-59(1), Pune Shikshak Sahakari Patsanstha, Junner, Vs. Junnar-410502 Pune Maharashtra Pan-Aaaaj3324K अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: None Department By: Shri R.Y. Balawade, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 28-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 02-02-2026 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Manish Borad:- This Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Delhi Framed U/S 250 Of The Act, Dated 10.03.2025 For A.Y. 2021-22 Which Is Arising Out Of Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Dated 05.12.2022. 2. Registry Has Informed That There Is Delay Of 45 Days In Filing Of The Present Appeal. Application For Condonation Of Delay Alongwith Affidavit Is Placed On Record & On Going Through The Same, We Find That The Delay Is Not Intentional. Therefore In The Larger Interest Of Justice & Placing Reliance

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "ए "न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD

Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust, Pune vs. CIT (Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 1357/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption), 251, Budhwar Peth, City Post Chowk, Vs. Pune Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaatb4383K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, V.P:

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA

Anant Keshav Rajegaonkar, Nashik vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Nashik

ITA 1252/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1249 To 1252/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Anant Keshav Rajegaonkar, Nashik vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Nashik

ITA 1251/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1249 To 1252/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Anant Keshav Rajegaonkar, Nashik vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Nashik

ITA 1250/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1249 To 1252/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Anant Keshav Rajegaonkar, Nashik vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Nashik

ITA 1249/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1249 To 1252/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Renuka Silver Merchents, Nizamabad vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Nizamabad

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

ITA 972/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee challenged the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, inter alia, contending that, the A.O. erred in treating the cash deposits made during the demonetization period as unexplained

Rajasekhar Naidu Galla, Tirupati vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Tirupathi

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

ITA 917/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

facts in invoking the provisions of Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to revise the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.ws. 144B of the Act 2. The order of the Ld. PCTT, erred in passing the Order under Section 263 of the Act treating the completion ... void and deserved to be cancelled, inter alia, for the reason that it has been passed without jurisdiction as the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act which is sought to be revised was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue

Uttam Kumar Reddy Korupol, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 770/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 69

ITA No 765 769 and 770 of 2025 Laxma Reddy Korpolu and others आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE

Leela Reddy Korupol, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 769/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

addition of Rs.1,53,17,161/- under section 69 of the Act in the hands of the assessee and completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.04.2021, determining total income of the assessee at Rs.5,81,47,521/-. 4. Aggrieved with the order

Laxma Reddy Korpolu, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 765/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

addition of Rs.1,53,17,161/- under section 69 of the Act in the hands of the assessee and completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.04.2021, determining total income of the assessee at Rs.5,81,47,521/-. 4. Aggrieved with the order

Bscpl Aurang Tollway Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 612/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay, wherein it was submitted that the appeal for the relevant assessment year was required to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the

Section 143(3)Section 263

admitting the same loss at Rs. 277,7468,523/-. The case has been selected for scrutiny and the assessment has been completed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) and 143(3B) on 15.04.2021 and accepted the returned loss. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings ... toll road over a period of concessionaire agreement. Therefore, the Ld. PCIT held that, the assessment order passed by the A.O. under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) and Section 143(3B) on 15.04.2021 in allowing the excessive depreciation on cost incurred for development of toll road as intangible asset