← 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)

ITO-12(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Mystical Infratech Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4266/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shr Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.4266/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Income Tax Officer- M/S. Mystical Infaratech Pvt. Ltd., 12(3)(4),Room No.147A, 1St बिधम/ Ground Floor, D. B.House,, Floor ,Ayankar Bhavan, Vs. Gen A.K.Vaidya Marg, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 Mumbai-400 063. 020. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aagcm1049J (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri. Nimesh Yadav( Cit Dr) प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. A.K.Ghosh , Pooja Ramder , Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 22.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 19.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 30.03.2017, Passed By Cit (Appeals)-20 Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2011-12. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:-

For Appellant: Shri. Nimesh Yadav( CIT DR)For Respondent: Shri. A.K.Ghosh , Pooja
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 56(2)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHR AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं

Sony Pictures Networks India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (It) RG 4(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 2130/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 2130/मुं/2017 ("न.व .2012-13) Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited [Formerly Known As Sony Pictures Networks India Private Limited (As Successor To Spe Networks- India Inc. (‘Speni’) Which Has Merged Into Spni With Effect From An Appointed Date Of 1 April 2015) Erstwhile Multi Screen Media Private Limited] Interface Building No.7, 5Th Floor, Off Malad Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 064. Pan: Aabcs-1728-D ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (International Taxation), Range-4(2)(2),Mumbai, Room No.!624, 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri P.J.Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate With Ms.Aarati Sathe, Anchal Gupta & Umedmal Jain. ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Surabhi Sharma With Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2022

For Appellant: Shri P.J.Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate with Ms.Aarati SatheFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma with Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(3)

pronouncement : 19/09/2022 2 आदेश/ ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against assessment order dated 31/01/2017 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. 2. Shri P.J.Pardiwala appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted

DCIT, CC - 1 (2), Chennai vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms Risk Services Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 262/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.262/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms Risk Services Ltd., No. 02, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 034. Dare House, N S C Bose Road, Parrys, Chennai 600 001. [Pan:Aabcc6610Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, Fca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4 (I/C), Chennai, Dated 26.11.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing Risk Assessment Services & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2015-16 On 25.09.2015 Admitting A Total Income Of ₹.2,39,21,070/-. After Following Due Procedure & Considering The 2

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

After following due procedure and considering the 2 I.T.A. No. 262/Chny/20 submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 30.12.2017 assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.15,54,09,342/- after making

Saravana Foundation, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(4), Chennai

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

ITA 3376/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3376/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 M/S. Saravana Foundation, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 15, Bajanai Koil Street, Non Corporate Ward 15(4), Besant Nagar, Chennai 600 090. Chennai. [Pan:Abmfs6610H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Chandrasekaran, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai Dated 17.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 Challenging Confirmation Of Penalty Levied Under Section 271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147oSection 148Section 271BSection 44A

served on the assessee. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 30.03.2015 and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹.20,38,090/- after making disallowance of expenditure claimed by the assessee

Indus Cityscapes, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2 (2), Chennai

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

ITA 1226/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1226/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Indus Cityscapes Constructions Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., No. 5-C, Ega Trade Centre, Income Tax, 809, Poonamalle High Road, Kilpauk, Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai 600 010. Chennai. [Pan:Aabci2175A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai Dated 06.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Company Is Carrying Real Estate, Construction & Related Activities, Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2008-09 On 30.09.2008 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹.84,76,260/- & The Same Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 41(1)

I.T.A. No.1226/Chny/18 Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 23.12.2010 on an income of ₹.6,79,89,064/-. Subsequently a notice under section 148 of the Act dated 27.03.2013 was issued ... return filed in lieu of the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 24.02.2014. 3. On verification of details of M/s. V.S. Net Ltd., the Assessing Officer has noted that

Watanmal (India) Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-3(2), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2407/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T(Tp).A. No. 4/Chny/2018 & I.T.A. No. 2407/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2006-07 & 2008-09 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Watanmal (India) Pvt. Ltd., Old No. 12, New No. 14, Ground Floor, Income Tax, Sripuram Second Street, Royapettah, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai 600 014. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacw6624B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. S. Palanikumar, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2006- 07 Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, Bengaluru Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S. 144C(5) R.W.S. 254 R.W.S. 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 27.12.2017. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 R.W.S. 92Ca(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palanikumar, CIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 92C

assessee for the assessment year 2006- 07 is directed against the order passed by the ld. Dispute Resolution Panel -2, Bengaluru under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144C(5) r.w.s. 254 r.w.s. 144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated ... appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09 is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 2 I.T(TP).A. No.4/Chny/18 & ITA No. 2407/Chny/17 144C(5) dated 12.07.2017. Since both the appeals are filed