← 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)

Madhusoodan Paliwal, Udaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Udaipur

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

ITA 156/JODH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradshri Madhusoodan Paliwal, Vs Ito 95-96D, Hiran Magri, Sector-14, Ward-1(1) Udaipur-313002 (Raj) Udaipur (Raj) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahlpp1550C Assessee By Shri Sandeep Jhanwar, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21/03/2023 Date Of 22/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M.: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2015-2016 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Udaipur Dated 11.09.2020. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 5Section 53ASection 69Section 8

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Lalit Johari, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/JODH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad40/Jodh/2019 (Assessment Year- 2014-15) Vs The Acit Shri Lalit Johri 65-A, Bank Colony, Rai Central Circle-2 Ka Bagh, Jodhpur Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agfpj 5542 H

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 154Section 234A

case a search u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 8-05-2014 and thereafter the assessment was completed us 153A r/w section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. After carrying out the search, the ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur assuming jurisdiction issued notices u/s 153A

Smt. Bhawana Nagori, Bhilwara vs. ITO, Ward-4, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 379/JODH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad379/Jodh/2019 (Assessment Year- 2010-11) Vs The Ito Smt. Bhawna Nagori B-332, Shastri Nagar Ward-4 Bhilwara Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adlpn 9819 Q

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 154Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT

Shailendra Jhanwar, Chittorgarh vs. ITO, Ward-3, Chittorgarh

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

ITA 219/JODH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradshri Shailendra Jhanwar, Ito, J-16, M/S. Mgb & Co. Llp, Ward-3, Lal Kothi Yojana, Sahakar Chittorgarh Marg, Jaipur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Abppj8770L Assessee By Shri Sandeep Jhanwar, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21/03/2023 Date Of 22/03/2023 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Inter Globle Aviation Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2539/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhryinter Globle Aviation Ltd. Vs. Acit Upper Ground Floor, Circle – 10(1) Westren Wing, Thapper New Delhi House-124, Janpath, New Delhi-110001 Pan No. Aabci 2726 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Soumya Jain, Adv. Revenue By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.09.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) - Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :- Inter Globle Aviation Ltd Vs Acit 2 3. Assessee Is A Company Stated To Be Engaged In The Business Of Operation Of Airlines Under The Name & Style Of Indigo. Assessee Electronically Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2018-19 On 30.11.2018 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.18,26,11,80,910/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Thereafter Assessment Was Framed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Act Vide Order Dated 19.04.2021 & The Total Income Was Determined At Rs.24,31,89,53,536/-.

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 271D

facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant against the order dated 19.04.2021 passed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act erroneously holding that the appellant has opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas ... erred on facts in not appreciating that the appellant had not opted for settlement of the aforesaid appeal filed against order passed under section 143(3) under the VSV Act [but had opted for settlement of an altogether different appeal filed before the CIT(A) against order passed under section

Vessel Warehousing Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-09, New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4782/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(2)

order under section 263 of the Act, more so when the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) under section 143(3) the Act is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. 4. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case ... PCIT has erred in law and on the facts in setting aside the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act by the Ld. AO on the ground that the Appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of its income. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances

Shri Manmohan Singh Kapur, Hoshiarpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 68/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Shri Sukhjit Singh, Hoshiarpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 67/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Smt Harneet Kaur Juneja, Jalandhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 66/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Smt. Rajinder Kaur, Hoshiarpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Dasuya

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

record in the above mentioned case for the assessment year 2011-12 shows that the assessment order had been framed on 10.12.2018 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter refer to as The Act’). The examination of the assessment order and the facts

Diamond Heritage, Jalandhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 116/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. K. Bhagat, CA & Sh. Vikas Bhagat, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned Principal CIT has erred in holding that the assessment order under section 143(3) dt. 27.12.2019 is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue and thereby setting aside the order by invoking

Shri Arshad Mohd Malik, Jammu vs. Inmcvome Tax Officer Ward 2 (4), Udhampur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 168/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69CSection 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Community Policing Suvidha Centre ( West ), Now Known As Sub Division Saanjh (Community Policing) Society, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward, Jalandhar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 14/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 234BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Sub Division Saanjh Community Pol Icing Society, Kapurthala vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Ward, Jalandhar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 13/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 234BSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

M/S Chemester Food Industry, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-III, Amritsar

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

ITA 583/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)

income of the assessee. Accordingly the Ld. AO completed the assessment on total income of Rs. 8,26,44,936/- on 29.03.2016 under section 143(3) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by recording the following

M/S Sgepl Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 28/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.28/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Sgepl Infrastructure Private Limited (Private Limited Company) (Earlier Known As Satish Goel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.) Gokul Puram, Kachna Road, Khamardih, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aajcs6322H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH

Shri Shashikant Bhagvanjibhai Rajpara, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 59/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2017-18 Shashikant Bhavajjibhai Rajpara Vs. The Pr.Cit-1 409, Aadarsh Plaza, Rajkot. 150 Ft. Ring Road Rajkot. Pan : Abipr 9935 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Rajkot [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Pr.Cit Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Dated 7.2.2022 Pertaining To The Asst.Year2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Appeal Are As Under: “1. The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax - Rajkot -1, Rajkot Erred In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act, Particularly In The Light Of Reasons Stated By Him In The Show Cause Notice & In The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act & Hence The Impugned Order Is Bad In Law. 2. The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Rajkot - 1, Rajkot Erred In Setting Aside The Assessment Order Framed U/S 143(3)Of The Act By Holding That The Ao Has Not Properly Examined The Facts Of The Case In 2

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69C

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ "यायपीठ, , , , राजकोट "यायपीठ IN THE

Shri Chetankumar Pragjibhai Rabadiya, Morbi vs. ITO Ward 1, Morbi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as un- admitted

ITA 12/RJT/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2011-12 Shri Chetankumar Pragjibhai Vs. Ito, Ward-1 Rabadiya Morbi. 115-Umiya Plot Vistar A/P : S. Sanala, Morbi. Pan : Alupr 8308 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-3, Rajkot [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Cit(A)Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Dated 29.11.2019 Pertaining To The Asst.Year 2011-12. 2. At The Time Of Hearing None Came Present On Behalf Of The Assessee Despite Service Of Notice Nor Any Application Seeking Adjournment Was Filed Before Us. Even In The Past When The Appeal Was Listed For Hearing On Four Occasions, Twice An Application Seeking Adjournment Was Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee By His 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ "यायपीठ, , , , राजकोट "यायपीठ IN THE

M/S. Asean Box Corporation, Gandhidham - Kutch vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 118/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT

Shri Piyush Vinodrai Parekh, Rajkot vs. The DCIT, International Taxation, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 137/RJT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 57

Appellate order dated 11.08.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad, arising out of the Assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2016-17. I.T.A No. 137/Rjt/2020