← 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)

Harshadbhai Maganbhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(3)(2), Surat

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

ITA 111/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.111/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 (Hybrid Hearing) Harshadbhai Maganbhai Patel Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3)(2), बनाम/ C-1007, Pratisha Tower, Surat, Anavil Business Center, Vs. Sarela Wadi, Ghod-Dod Road, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat- 395 007 Surat-395 007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adgpp 3387 C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 24/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/10/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT

Hivtap Nirmulan Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Yavatmal vs. ITO Ward-1, Yavatmal

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

ITA 571/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalehivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit T.B. Karyalayapandharkawada Road, ……………. Appellant Yavatmal -445 001, Maharashtra. Pan–Aabah6751K V/S Income Tax Officer, ……………. Respondent Ward–1, Yavatmal-445001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 249(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Hivtap Nirmulan Karmachari, Sahakari

Jaisingh Krushnarao Chavhan, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4, Aaykar Bhavan Nagpur

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

ITA 562/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalejaishingh Krushnarao Chavhan, 95, Butibori Industrial Area,Tiwari, Nagpur 440 002, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan -Adopc8820B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 44A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaishingh Krushnarao Chavhan, 95

Lata Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. ITO WD3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 549/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.534/NAG./2025 (Assessment Year

Alkesh Sharadraoji Khadse, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 544/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.534/NAG./2025 (Assessment Year

Lata Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 537/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.534/NAG./2025 (Assessment Year

Alkesh Sharadraoji Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 536/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.534/NAG./2025 (Assessment Year

Pawan Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 534/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRIPAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.534/NAG./2025 (Assessment Year

Vijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, Nagpur vs. Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4 Nagpur, Nagpur

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

ITA 183/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevijaykumar Rooplalji Jaiswal, 46, Middle Ring Road, East Wardhaman Nagar, ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440008, Maharashtra. Pan–Abrpj7368Q V/S A.C.I T. Circle–4, ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.K.P. Dewani, A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.K.P. Dewani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

disallowed the claim of Rs.16,22,425/– and assessed the total income of Rs.48,64,940/– and passed the order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 17/12/2016. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). 4. In appellate proceedings

No H 1043 Bhujabalapatnam Primary Agriculture Cooperative Credit Society Ltd, Krishna Dist vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudiwada

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

ITA 426/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal. The Petitioner/Appellant Society Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal, Wherein It Was Submitted That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Was Sent To The Email Of Its Then Ar, Ca B.V. Rao, Instead Of Its Email "Krishnapacs085@Gmail.Com," As Had Been Requested By It. The Appellant Society Came To Know Of The Order Only When Itd Officials Called Upon It To Pay The Tax Arrears. It Further Submitted That, Due To The Above Circumstances Beyond Its Control & Prayed That The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal May Please Be Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & That The Appeal Be Decided On Merits.

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80P(2)(a)

said deduction in the return of income filed on 15-12-2019, although belatedly, before the A.O. had completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT Visakhapatnam Bench

JCIT(OSD), CC-1, Lko, Lucknow vs. Acp Tollways Private Limited, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and the Cross

ITA 131/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 32

depreciation. This fact is evident from the depreciation schedule forming part of financial statement as well as the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act for the said assessment year. Again, in the assessment year 2009-10 also, the assessee claimed depreciation on the investment ... facility as an intangible asset and the Assessing Officer allowed assessee's claim of depreciation in an assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act. Thus, as could be seen from the facts on record, in the preceding assessment years the Assessing Officer after examining assessee's claim

Navudai Shikshan and Jan Kalyan Sewa Samiti, Kanpur vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 96/LKW/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2016-17 Navudai Shikshan & Jan Kalyan Sewa Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Samiti, 117/K/30, Sarvodaya Nagar, Tax (Exemption), Lucknow Kanpur-208005 Pan: Aagfn4916N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.10.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit (Exemption), Lucknow Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 30.03.2021 Setting Aside The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act For The A.Y. 2016-17 On 15.12.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because The Order Passed By Cit(E) U/S 263 Of The Act Dt. 30.03.2021 Is Without Jurisdiction, Bad In Law & Be Quashed. 02. Because The Order Passed By Ao, Being Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue The Action Of The Cit(E) Set-Asiding The Said Order Is Without Jurisdiction, Contrary To The Provisions Of Law, Be Quashed. 03. Because The Order Passed By The Ao Being Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue, The Cit(E) Has Erred In Law In Setting Aside The Same, The Order Passed By Cit(E) Be Quashed & That As Passed By The Ao Be Restored. 04. Because The Cit(E) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Initial Assessment Was A Deep Scrutiny Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) Wherein Voluminous Queries Were Raised Which Were Complied With & Thoroughly Examined/ Verified By The Ao, The Necessary Enquiring Having Being Done, It Is Neither A Case Of No Inquiring Or Lack Of Enquiring, As Such The Cit(E) Has Erred In Setting Aside The Assessment Order, The Order Passed By Cit(E) Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

Exemption), Lucknow under section 263 of the Income Tax Act dated 30.03.2021 setting aside the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act for the A.Y. 2016-17 on 15.12.2018. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “01. Because the order passed ... appeal is taken up for adjudication. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessment of the assessee was completed under section 143(3) on 15.12.2018 in the status of an AOP in which exemption under section 11 was not allowed. The society had applied for grant of registration

Sh. Sukhvinder Singh, Kanpur vs. Pr CIT, Central, Kanpur

ITA 191/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 263

find that the order impugned passed by the PCIT under Section of the Act whereunder the order passed by the Ld. AO under Section 143(3) r.w.s.153A of the Act has been sought to be revised is not sustainable due to lack of jurisdiction in invoking Section ... Nos.584 H d. of 2015 dated 4-12-2015 - “5.4, The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 153C was passed after getting approval of Addl. CIT under section 153Dof the I.T. Act and therefore such an assessment cannot

Sh. Sukhvinder Singh, Kanpur vs. Pr CIT, Central, Kanpur

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 190/LKW/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 263

find that the order impugned passed by the PCIT under Section of the Act whereunder the order passed by the Ld. AO under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act has been sought to be revised is not sustainable due to lack of jurisdiction in invoking Section ... dated 4-12-2015 - “5.4, The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 153C was passed after getting approval of Addl. CIT under section 153Dof the I.T. Act and therefore such an assessment cannot be revised without revising

Shri Vinay Pratap Singh, Lucknow vs. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 688/LKW/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Swarn Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

dated 21.08.2015, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee against the orders passed by the ld. AO under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31.01.2013. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “01. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income ... warrant the proceedings under section 153C. The ld. AR submitted that even though the assessment in this year was under the provisions of section 143(3), after the issue of the notice under section 142(1) (since it was the search year), the issue of that notice under section

Diy Furnitures Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, TDS, Ward-1, Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 981/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 250

Assessment Year 2017-18 arising out of assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), Ahmedabad under section 143(3) of the and the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, TDS, Ward -1, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer or AO”] under ... outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 517 days in filing the appeal against the order passed under section 143(3), and a delay of 61 days in filing the appeal against the order passed under sections 201(1)/201(1A). The assessee has filed a duly

Diy Furnitures Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 980/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shree Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 250

Assessment Year 2017–18 arising out of assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), Ahmedabad under section 143(3) of the and the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, TDS, Ward -1, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer or AO”] under ... outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 517 days in filing the appeal against the order passed under section 143(3), and a delay of 61 days in filing the appeal against the order passed under sections 201(1)/201(1A). The assessee has filed a duly

Maruti Brokerage House Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1080/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jimi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 156Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL

Maruti Brokerage House Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1079/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jimi Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 156Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL

Mr. Arpanbhai Virambhai Desai, Gandhinagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 759/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT.DR
Section 12Section 147Section 263

certainly cannot be invoked casually or mechanically. (viii) If the original assessment is processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and not Section 143(3) of the Act, the proviso to Section 147 will not apply. In other words, although the reopening may be after the expiry of four