← 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)

Javaharlal S Dhariwal, Surat vs. ITO Ward 1(2)(2), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 203/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.203/Srt/2020 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Javaharlal S Dhariwal Income Tax Officer, 886 Old Gidc, Nr. Bank Of Ward-1(2)(2), Surat-395001 Vs Baroda, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Pan No: Aaypd 4207 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mahul Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 28.04.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Surat [For Short To As “Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 30.01.2020 For Assessment Year 2013- 14, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Income-Tax Officer-Ward-1(2)(2), Surat/Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making A Disallowance Of Rs.3,45,378/- U/S 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. Javaharlal S Dhariwal 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Partly Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer By Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs.2,46,915/- Out Of Total Disallowance Of Rs.4,93,830/- On Account Of Machinery Salary Expenses. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.3,95,466/- Being Interest Expenses Claimed U/S 57 Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 254(1)Section 40Section 57

assessment year 2013- 14, which in turn arises out assessment order passed by Income-tax Officer-ward-1(2)(2), Surat/Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 12.02.2016. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

Jinesh Rameshchandra Sheth, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Bharuch

In the result, ground No. of the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 513/SRT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.513/Srt/2019 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Physical Court) Jinesh Rameshchandra Income Tax Officer, Sheth, 72, Princess Street, Ward-2(2), Bharuch, Vs Chapsey Building, Room Bharuch-392001 No.35, 3Rd Floor, Mumbai- 400002 Pan No: Ahzps 5778 K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rajiv Chanda, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23.02.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 28.04.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Vadodara [For Short To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 02.08.2019 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Income Tax Officer-Ward-2(2), Bharuch /Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 26.03.2015. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “ Jinesh R Sheth “I. Addition On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 – Rs.21,57,500/-: 1. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.21,57,500/- To The Income Of The Assessee By Confirming The Following Amounts As Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of The Act. Name Relationship Pan Amount 1 Shri Chimanlal Sheth Grand Father Bcaps7685D 11,50,000/- 2 Utkarsh V Sheth Nephew Cxbps0158K 25,000/- 3 Medha Sheth Wife Bawps2706J 3,99,500/- 4 Chintak Sheth Son-17 Yr. Cwfps3715P 4,82,000/- 5 V R Sheth Brother Ahzps5785J 1,01,000/- Sub Total: 21,57,500/-

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

assessment year 2012-13, which in turn arises out assessment order passed by Income Tax Officer-Ward-2(2), Bharuch /Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 26.03.2015. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “ Jinesh