← 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)

Gyan Vigyan Krida Vikas Sanstha, Manbhawan Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 446/IND/2025[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Indore03 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI

Rajratan Foundation, Indore vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 421/IND/2025[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Indore03 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)

hand are different in so far the audit report was filed by the assessee after the completion of the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Act. In this regard we note that the assessment remains pending if any appeal is pending before the higher forum. In other words

M/S. M.P. Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal vs. The DCIT Excemption, Bhopal

Appeal is allowed

ITA 164/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

arrest eur, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH

Chhatrapati Nagri Sahkari Patsanstha M, Beed vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jalna

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1804/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68Section 80P

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Aum Citiscapes LLP, Pune vs. The ITO Ward 7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1160/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Ms. Abhilasha S. Kakani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL

Proton Positive Health Care India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle -16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 812/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.812/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Proton Positive Health Vs. Assistant Commissioner Care India Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle-16(2), Pan: Aafcp6862K Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (For Short, “Cit(A)”) Dated 07/03/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”) Dated 28/06/2019 For Ay 2016-17. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Passed By The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)

India Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT Rs.1.55/- per share) under section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 18/12/2018, determined the income of the assessee company after making the aforementioned additions. 5. The Ld. AR has brought ... notice that the assessee company had not carried the assessment order passed in its case under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 18/12/2018, any further in appeal. 6. Thereafter, the AO vide his order under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, dated 28/06/2019, imposed upon the assessee company

Lalitha Padmaja Thallapalli, Kurnool vs. ITO., Ward-1, Kurnool

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

ITA 1243/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

demonetization period. The A.O., after considering the submissions of the assessee and also taking note of various facts, completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) on 23.12.2019 and determined the total income at Rs. 87,76,417/- by making various

Netcracker Technology Solutions (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 730/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153Section 92C(3)

MANJUNATHA G., A.M : This appeal filed by the assessee is against the final assessment order passed under Sections 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), dated 06.06.2024, 2 NetCracker Technology Solutions (India) Private Limited, in pursuance to the Directions dated ... ASSESSMENT ORDER 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the final assessment order passed by the Ld. AO under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C(13) read with Section 144B of the Act is barred by limitation as the same is passed beyond the time

Syed Mohammed Asad Ullah Hussaini, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 268/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.268/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Syed Mohammed Asad Vs. Acit, Ullah Hussaini, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Abfph0148G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, Dated 14.09.2023, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, ”Ao”) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 28.03.2022, For The Assessment Year 2016- 17. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(Appeals) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, dated 14.09.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, ”AO”) under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), dated 28.03.2022, for the Assessment Year 2016- 17. The assessee has assailed the impugned order ... properties and cheque numbers, and clearly referred to the assessee. 8. The AO thereafter framed the assessment vide his order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act and assessed the total 6 Syed Mohammed Asad Ullah Hussaini vs ACIT income of the assessee

Brightcom Group Limited (Formerly Known As Lycos Internet Limited), Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 1862/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14
Section 145Section 92BSection 92C

filed by the assessee is directed against the Final Assessment Order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (for short “the A.O.”) under Sections 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. ITA 1862/Hyd/2017 Brightcom Group Limited 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), pertaining ... filed certain additional grounds from Ground Nos.10 to 15 challenging the validity of the final assessment order passed by the A.O. under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in light of the provisions of Section

Khaitan Winding Wire Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 877/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, &For Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

Prompt Commodities Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2004/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Prompt Commodities Limited Ito, Ward 12(1) Block-A, Garden Apartments, Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, P-7, 2/10, Sarat Bose Road, Minto Chowringhee Square, Vs. Park, Kolkata-700020, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcp1910G Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Prompt

Balakumar Radhakrishna, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2309/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George Kआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2309/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ (एस एम सी), "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI

Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-1(2), Chennai vs. Kanakiliyanallur Narayanan Nehru, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue for Assessment

ITA 1902/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Bipin C.N, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Naga Prasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). The impugned orders arise from the reassessment orders framed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ in short) under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act dated 12.12.2019 for the w2-5 Assessment Years (‘AYs’ in short

Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-1(2), Chennai vs. Shri Kanakiliyanallur Narayanan Nehru, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue for Assessment

ITA 1901/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Bipin C.N, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Naga Prasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). The impugned orders arise from the reassessment orders framed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ in short) under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act dated 12.12.2019 for the w2-5 Assessment Years (‘AYs’ in short

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Kanakiliyanallur Narayanan Nehru, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue for Assessment

ITA 1900/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Bipin C.N, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Naga Prasad, Advocate
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). The impugned orders arise from the reassessment orders framed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ in short) under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act dated 12.12.2019 for the w2-5 Assessment Years (‘AYs’ in short

Nandini Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(3), Bangalore

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1649/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice –Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Kumar L, Advocate
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 58Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

learned Commissioner of Income- tax [Appeals] u/s 250 by upholding partially the Assessment order of the learned assessing officer passed under Section 143(3) of the Act to Page 2 of 6 the extent which is against the appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances

Bhavana Co-Op Credit Society Niyamita, Sirsi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sirsi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1074/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand H Kalakeri, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)

ITANo.1074/Bang/2025 M/s. Bhavana Co op Credit Society Niyamitha, Sirsi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI

Gonikoppal Primary Rural Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Limited, Kodagu vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-3, Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1072/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand H Kalakeri, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(i)

ITANo.1074/Bang/2025 M/s. Bhavana Co op Credit Society Niyamitha, Sirsi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI

ACIT-15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Lionbridge Technologies LLP, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA

ITA 6191/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Paras SavlaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

date of order 31/03/2019. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 29/03/2016, determining the total income at Rs.20,64,97,610/-. The assessee challenged the impugned assessment order before