← 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, Ward-3(3), Thane vs. Shri Shaitesh Dattatray Thakare, Thane

Appeal is partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 290/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Income Tax Officer, (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Ward 3(3), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, Company), K-14, New Vaity Wadi, R.No.8, Ashar It Park, Vs. Vishnu Nagar, Road No.16Z, Naupada, Wagle Estate Midc, Thane (West), Thane (W) - 400604 Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Ward 3(3), (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Room No.8, Company), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, K-14, New Vaity Wadi, Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Vishnu Nagar, Thane (W) - 400604 Naupada, Thane (West), Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Present For:

For Appellant: Ms. Radha Halbe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue) by filing the aforesaid cross appeals sought to set aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua the quantum proceedings under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short ‘the Act) and impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua penalty levied under section ... Rs.38,61,698/- to the total income of the assessee and thereby framed the assessment at total income of Rs.41,09,458/- under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. 5. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) who has restricted the additions to Rs.9

Shailesh D. Thakre (Prop of Shivam Trading, Mumbai vs. ITO WD3(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1733/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Income Tax Officer, (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Ward 3(3), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, Company), K-14, New Vaity Wadi, R.No.8, Ashar It Park, Vs. Vishnu Nagar, Road No.16Z, Naupada, Wagle Estate Midc, Thane (West), Thane (W) - 400604 Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Ward 3(3), (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Room No.8, Company), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, K-14, New Vaity Wadi, Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Vishnu Nagar, Thane (W) - 400604 Naupada, Thane (West), Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Present For:

For Appellant: Ms. Radha Halbe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue) by filing the aforesaid cross appeals sought to set aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua the quantum proceedings under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short ‘the Act) and impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua penalty levied under section ... Rs.38,61,698/- to the total income of the assessee and thereby framed the assessment at total income of Rs.41,09,458/- under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. 5. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) who has restricted the additions to Rs.9

Shailesh D. Thakare, Thane vs. ITO WD 3(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1732/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Income Tax Officer, (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Ward 3(3), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, Company), K-14, New Vaity Wadi, R.No.8, Ashar It Park, Vs. Vishnu Nagar, Road No.16Z, Naupada, Wagle Estate Midc, Thane (West), Thane (W) - 400604 Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Ward 3(3), (Prop. Of Shivam Trading Room No.8, Company), 6Th Floor, B – Wing, K-14, New Vaity Wadi, Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Vishnu Nagar, Thane (W) - 400604 Naupada, Thane (West), Mumbai – 400 602 Pan: Abzpt 0626P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Shailesh D. Thakare Present For:

For Appellant: Ms. Radha Halbe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue) by filing the aforesaid cross appeals sought to set aside the impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua the quantum proceedings under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short ‘the Act) and impugned order dated 20.02.2020 qua penalty levied under section ... Rs.38,61,698/- to the total income of the assessee and thereby framed the assessment at total income of Rs.41,09,458/- under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. 5. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) who has restricted the additions to Rs.9

Tech Mahindra Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle - 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6573/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Prashant Maharishiआअसं. 6573/मुं/2019 ("न. व. 2012-13 ) Tech Mahindra Limited, Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacm-3484-F ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit, Cir. 2(3)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistri, Sr. Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Damor सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 17/03/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: 6573/Mum/2019 This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, Mumbai [In Short 'The Cit(A)’] Dated 04/09/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Shri J.D.Mistri, Sr.Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That The Assessee Has Raised Additional Grounds Of 2 Appeal Assailing Jurisdiction Assumed By The Assessing Officer U/S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act,1961 ( In Short 'The Act') & Validity Of The Order Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act. At This Stage He Would Be Confirning His Submissions On The Additional Grounds Raised.

For Appellant: Shri J.D.Mistri, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

reopening. The Assessing Officer without providing additional information to enable the assessee to identify the party /customer proceeded 3 to make assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and passed assessment order on 31/12/2018. 2.1 The ld.Counsel for the assessee asserted that in the absence of complete ... Undisputedly, assessee is engaged in the business of providing information technology services. In fact, in the original assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s.144C{3) of the Act, the assessing officer has accepted this factual position. In the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, a copy of which