← 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)

Santosh Kumar Sinha, Purnia vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 268/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraita Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Santosh Kumar Sinha…….………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant S/O Late Satya Narayan Lal, Carriers Colony, Sakti Nagar, Purnia, Bihar – 854301. [Pan: Awhps7019N] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri K. P. Jalan, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 09, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 31.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.268/Pat/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member and

S M Associates, Taloja vs. Income Tax Officer, Panvel

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

ITA 1748/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1748/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 S. M. Associates, Vs. Ito, National E- Shop No.6, S.M. Plaza, Assessment Centre, Sector- 23, Taloja, Delhi. Raigad- 410208. Pan : Adjfs7283H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shridhar Achari Revenue By : Shri Bharat Andhale Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The A.O. Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Making Additions To Gross Total Income By Rs.3,02,00,000/- Which Capital Contribution By Partners To The Partnership Firm. 2. The A.O. Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Initiating Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) & U/S.271Aac(1). 3. The Order Appealed Against Is Illegal, Invalid & Void-Ab- Initio.”

For Appellant: Shri Shridhar AchariFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE