← 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)

A.S.Motiwala Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are, accordingly, disposed of

ITA 2773/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2773/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) As Motiwala Jewellers Pvt. बिधम/ Ito-12(2)(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. (Formerly Known As Ghazi Mumbai-400020. Gems & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd) 40 Rebello Road Bandra West, Mumbai-400050. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecg8165B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Ms Madhuri Tambe Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 14.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee, Assails The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition On Merits, To The Tune Of Rs.59,53,440/- U/S 69C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). In Other Words, Assessee Assails The Action Of Ld Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of Ao, Wherein He Disallowed The Entire Purchases Of Diamonds Made From M/S. Mohit Enterprises (Alleged Concern Of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain Group).

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi/Ms MadhuriFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr
Section 147Section 148Section 69C

followed by the statutory notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act and the order of assessment under section 143(3) r/w section 147 of the Act was passed on 30th March, 2015 and total income assessed at Rs. 1,46,82,548/-. The A.O. thus made

Savita Mercantiles Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.168/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Savita Mercantiles Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Ito-3(3)(2) 83, A Wing, Mittal Tower, Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- Karve Road, New Marine 400021. Lines, Churchgate, Maharashtra-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs9614G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Viraj Mehta Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 03.01.2023 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.45,00,000/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Receipt Of Share Application Money Only On The Basis Of Statement Given By Shri Pravin Kumar Jain.

For Appellant: Shri Viraj MehtaFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 183(6)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN

Rushabh Precision Bearings, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 7(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3270/MUM/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3270/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Rushabh Precision Bearings बिधम/ Acit-7(2) Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Fida Mansion, 2Nd Floor, 4, Marg, Mumbai-400020. Babijan Street, Nagdevi, Mumbai-400002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr5214N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Ex-Parte Order Dated 03.12.2007 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) For The Ay. 2003-04. 2. At The Outset, We Note That This Tribunal Had Dismissed This Appeal By An Ex-Parte Order Qua Assessee On 21.06.2022 Which Has Been Recalled By This Tribunal By Order Dated 24.04.2023 (Ma. No.66/Mum/2023).

For Appellant: Shri Mandar VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN