← 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)

Rakesh Bansal, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-34(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2559/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2015-16 Rakesh Bansal, Vs Acit, 403, Swastik Apartments, Plot Circle-34(1), No.2, Sec.09, New Delhi. Rohini, New Delhi. Pan: Aaipb2567R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca & Shri J.B. Sharma, Ca Revenue By : Shri Farhat Khan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex Parte Order Dated 26.11.2018 Of The Cit(A)-12, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, These All Relate To The Order Of The Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.4,22,00,498/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 & 69C Of The It Act, 1961. 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 30Th January, 2016 Declaring Net Taxable Income At Rs.87,16,680/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Has Derived Income From House Property, Salary Income As Director In Different Companies & Income From Other Sources. The Assessee Is Also A Partner In M/S High Seas Trading Corporation. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Claimed An Exemption Of Rs.4,11,45,660/- U/S 10(38) Of The It Act On Account Of Long-Term Capital Gain By Way Of Trading In The Scrips Of Icvl Chemicals Limited. From The Various Details Furnished By The Assessee, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Entered Into The Following Transactions:-

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri Farhat Khan, Sr. DR
Section 09Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY