← 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)

Concentrix Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Minacs Private Limited, Minacs Limited & Adity Birla Minacs Worldwide Limited ), Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of It (OSD)10(2)(2)Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-9(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5764/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh Daia
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92(1)Section 92B

partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 07/05/2015, for the Assessment Year 2011-12 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Act. 2.2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 5260/Mum/2017: GROUND ... transfer pricing & ITA No. 5823/Mum/2019 AY 2011-12 & 2012-13 & AY 2013-14 adjustment in the Draft Assessment Order, dated 16/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(1) of the Act. In the aforesaid Draft Assessment Order, the Assessing Officer computed the income of the Assessee

Concentrix Services India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Minacs Private Limited, Minacs Limited & Adity Birla Minacs Worldwide Limited ), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-10(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5260/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh Daia
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 92(1)Section 92B

partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 07/05/2015, for the Assessment Year 2011-12 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(3) of the Act. 2.2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 5260/Mum/2017: GROUND ... transfer pricing & ITA No. 5823/Mum/2019 AY 2011-12 & 2012-13 & AY 2013-14 adjustment in the Draft Assessment Order, dated 16/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(1) of the Act. In the aforesaid Draft Assessment Order, the Assessing Officer computed the income of the Assessee

Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 9004/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Ble

Section 10ASection 144C(5)Section 92C(3)

adjudicated at this stage. 20. Assessee has raised additional grounds which is reproduced below: - “Assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) is barred by limitation under the provisions of Section 153 of the Act.” 21. The additional ground raised

Bijender Singh Thakran, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2017/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: The Disposal Of The Appeal.” Ground No. 1 & 2:

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 4Section 44ASection 69A

I.T.A.No.2017/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ

Bony Polymers Private Limited, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1566/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshbony Polymers Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Plot No. 77, Sector-6, Circle-5(1), Faridabad, Haryana Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcb1594N

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT

Avaya India Private Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 1(1), Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 702/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageshwar Rao; &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)

pursuant to the directions of the Hon’ble Dispute, [ Resolution Panel - I (hereinafter referred to as “the Hon’ble DRP”) under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) and read with sections 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), is a vitiated order having been passed

Sumitomo Corporation India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-21(2), New Delhi

In the result Appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 486/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Verma
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

determining the income of the Appellant at Rs. 39,49,71,366/- in assessment order dated 21 February 2022 framed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act as against the income of Rs. 16,21,03,480/- per the return of income filed by the Appellant

Sai Computers Ltd., Meerut vs. ITO, Circle-1(2)(1), Meerut

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

ITA 2865/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 18.11.2022 arising from the intimation orders dated 12.09.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2020-21. 7. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged ... disallowance of Rs.35,10,013/- under Section 36(1)(va) while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee has placed similar contentions as in ITA No.2864/Del/2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2019-20 (supra). 9. The observations in Assessment Year

Sai Computers Ltd., Meerut vs. ITO, Circle-1(2) (1), Meerut

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

ITA 2864/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 18.11.2022 arising from the intimation orders dated 12.09.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2020-21. 7. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged ... disallowance of Rs.35,10,013/- under Section 36(1)(va) while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee has placed similar contentions as in ITA No.2864/Del/2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2019-20 (supra). 9. The observations in Assessment Year

Sai Computers Ltd., Meerut vs. ITO, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut

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

ITA 2863/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 18.11.2022 arising from the intimation orders dated 12.09.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2020-21. 7. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged ... disallowance of Rs.35,10,013/- under Section 36(1)(va) while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee has placed similar contentions as in ITA No.2864/Del/2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2019-20 (supra). 9. The observations in Assessment Year

Sai Computers Ltd, Meerut vs. ITO, Circle-1(2)(1), Meerut

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

ITA 2862/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 18.11.2022 arising from the intimation orders dated 12.09.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2020-21. 7. As per the grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged ... disallowance of Rs.35,10,013/- under Section 36(1)(va) while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee has placed similar contentions as in ITA No.2864/Del/2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2019-20 (supra). 9. The observations in Assessment Year

Ashok Aneja, Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

Accordingly, the grounds raised are sustained. The appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2747/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaashok Aneja Vs. Pr. Cit, House No. 30, Rohtak, Haryana Sukhdev Nagar, Panipat Haryana-132103 Pan : Aaqpa2793Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. G.S.PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SH

DCIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi vs. Bharat Sawhney, New Delhi

ITA 1337/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmady. Commissioner Of Vs. Sh. Bharat Sawhney Income Tax , F-3/18 Vasant Vihar Central Circle-6 New Delhi-110017 New Delhi Pan : Aatps0018F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. G.S.PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SH

Karcher Cleaning Systems Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT Spl. Range-5, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposed

ITA 4986/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Mrinal Kumar Das
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)

1 Karcher Cleaning Systems, ND IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH: ‘I’ NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI G. S

Bhasin Motors India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-4(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 3695/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Bhasin Motors India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 28, Raja Garden, Ward-4(4), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacb8884C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vikas Jain, Adv. Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2023 Order

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT

Hartron Sase Communications Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 1064/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: C: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR

DCIT, CC- 1, Faridabad vs. Sadjyoti Traders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection

ITA 3854/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshasstt. Yr: 2006-07

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

1 ITA no. 3854/Del/2017 & CO no. 31/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI

The Malkapur Urban Co-Opt .Bank Ltd, Akola vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Alola Circle, Akola

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

ITA 334/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Oct 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Malkapur Urban Co-Op. Vs. Acit, Akola Circle, Bank Ltd., Akola. K.N.D. & Associates, 502- 503, Satyam Apartment, Wardha Road, Dhantoli, Nagpur- 440012. Pan : Aaalt0274E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar Subramanyam Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.10.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.05.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. It Is Formed For The Purpose Of Banking Business. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Was Filed On 22.09.2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,00,56,920/-.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Subramanyam
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2(2), Nagpur vs. M/S. Sidheshwar Coal Corporation, Indore (M.P.)

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 122/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.122/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. Sidheshwar Coal Nagpur. Corporation, Dewas Naka, Lasudiya Mori, Near Agrawal Tol Kunta, Indore- 452010. Pan : Abgfs4604R Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Kailsh Kanojiya Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.10.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.01.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Trading In Coal. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Was Filed On 29.09.2010 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.41,340/-. Subsequently, The Search & Seizure Operations U/S 132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Were Conducted In The Residential & Business

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailsh Kanojiya
Section 132Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Cmr Transport Contractors Company Private Ltd, Vijyawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed,

ITA 69/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.69/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Cmr Transport Contractors Company Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax D.No.54-18/3-4, Sivapuram Colony Circle-2(1) Near Iti Gate Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan : Aaccc6075E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vamsi Rajesh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar Aves, DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)Section 44A

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम “एसएमसी”पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “SMC” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी