← 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)

DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Zee Entertinment Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ITA 512/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.512/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Zee Entertainment Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Enterprises Ltd. Vs. 18Th Floor, A Wing, Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Marathon Futurex, N. M. 400020. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz0243R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Jay Bhansali Revenue By: Shri Vinod Tanwani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/08/2022 O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-58, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Dated 05.10.2021 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 23.11.2013 Declaring An Income Of Rs.9,53,02,05,770/- Which Was Revised To Rs.9,53,45,48,223/- On 31.03.2015. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Noticed That The Assessee Has Entered Into International Transactions With Its Aes (Associated Enterprises) M/S. Taj Tv & Therefore A Reference Was Made Under Section 92Ca(1) Of The Act Dated 23.03.2015 To Transfer Pricing Officer-4(2), Mumbai. The Assessee Is In The Business Of Broadcasting Of Satellite Television Channels, Space Selling Agent For Other Television Channels, Sale Of Television Programmes, Films, Movies Etc. The Ao Finally Framed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C (13) Of The Act By Making Two Additions

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

television channels, space selling agent for other television channels, sale of television programmes, films, movies etc. The AO finally framed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144C (13) of the Act by making two additions 2 ITA. No.512/Mum/2022 AY. 2013-14 M/s. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited