← 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)

Nileshkumar Ramlaxman Upadhyay, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Bardoli

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

ITA 172/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.171 & 172/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Nileshkumar Ramlaxman Income Tax Officer Ward-2 Bardoli, 2Nd Floor, Bsnl Tower, Upadhyay Vs. 123, Bajar Faliyu, Raniamba Main Road, Bardoli-394601 Tapi, Surat-394365 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaopu 5931 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Rakesh R. Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Same Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (For Short To As “Nfac” / Cit(A), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 272B R.W.S 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Dated 11.06.2018 & 13.06.2018 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh R. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 272BSection 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर

Nileshkumar Ramlaxman Upadhyay, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Bardoli

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

ITA 171/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.171 & 172/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Nileshkumar Ramlaxman Income Tax Officer Ward-2 Bardoli, 2Nd Floor, Bsnl Tower, Upadhyay Vs. 123, Bajar Faliyu, Raniamba Main Road, Bardoli-394601 Tapi, Surat-394365 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaopu 5931 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Rakesh R. Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Same Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (For Short To As “Nfac” / Cit(A), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 272B R.W.S 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”] Dated 11.06.2018 & 13.06.2018 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh R. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 272BSection 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर

Breach Candy Hospital Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT (E) - 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1719/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhbreach Candy Hospital Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust, 60A, Bhulabhai Exemption Ward (1)(1) Desai Road, Cumballa Hill 506, 5Th Floor, Piramal S.O, Mumbai – 400026 Chamber, Lalbaug, Parel Mumbai – 400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatb0214D Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Shri Fenil Bhat Respondent By : S. Srinivasu Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 21.03.2023 For A.Y. 2009-10. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Via) 1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Denying The Claim Of The Appellant For Grant Of Exemption Under Section 10(23Cx(Via) Of The Act. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Following The Directions Of The Hon'Ble Bombay High Court To Grant Exemption Under Section 10(23Cxvia) Pursuant To Ad-Interim Relief Granted To The Appellant Vide Order Dated 17 January 2011. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Followed Directions Of Hon'Ble Bombay High Court. Provision For Gratuity To Be Treated As ‘Application Of Income’

For Appellant: Shri Fenil BhatFor Respondent: S. Srinivasu
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)

P a g e | 1 Breach Candy Hospital Trust Vs. ITO Exemption Ward (1)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE