← 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)

Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, 4(3), Kolkata vs. Privi Exports Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1605/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata…..……………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Privi Exports Pvt. Ltd….………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Office No.2, Gf, 91A/1, Park Street, Kol-16. [Pan: Aaicp6253B] C.O. No.67/Kol/2025 (In Ita No.1605/Kol/2025) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Privi Exports Pvt. Ltd.….……………………. ….……….……….……Cross-Objector Office No.2, Gf, 91A/1, Park Street, Kol-16. [Pan: Aaicp6253B] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata...…………………....…..…………….Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S B Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 02, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

Section 131Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh

Gartner Ireland Limited, Ireland vs. ACIT( It), Circle - 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 6674/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2023-24 Gartner Ireland Limited, Asst. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Two Park Place, Income Tax-2(3)(2), Hatch Street, Vs. Room No.610, 6Th Floor, Dublin 2, Ireland. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Correspondence Address: Bandra Kurla Complex, First International Financial Bandra East, Centre, Level 2, Mumbai-400051. Plot No. C-54 & 55, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan : Aaccg2919B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Gaurav Chikhale For Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-12-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟), Consequent To The Directions Given By The Dispute Resolution Panel [Drp], Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2023-24. 2 2. During The Course Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Submitted That The Present Appeal Has Been Filed Twice Due To Technical Oversight. In This Regard, The Ld.Ar Placed On Record A Request Letter Of The Assessee For Cancellation Of The Present Appeal, Filed On 17Th October, 2025, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav ChikhaleFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

which reads as under: “The Company refers to the appeal filed by it for AY 2023-24 against the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') for the captioned year. in this regard, the Company submits that

Crisil Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6600/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2022-23 Crisil Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of Lightbridge It Park, Income Tax, Crisil Limited, Vs. Circle-15(1)(2), Saki Vihar Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri East, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400072. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aaact3151E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dhanesh Bafna/Amol Mahajan For Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-12-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 14-08-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23. 2. Briefly Stated, Facts Of The Case Are That Assessment In This Case Was Completed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟), Vide Order Dt. 27-02-2025. The Assessee Thereafter Carried The Matter In 2 Appeal Before The Ld.Cit(A), Who Has Since Dismissed The Appeal & Against The Said Order, The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna/Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “I” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP