“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)

Jaishri Shivaji Waghralkar, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 22(1)(6), Mumabi

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

ITA 6781/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Jaishri Shivaji Waghralkar Income Tax Officer – Ward 22(1) 102A, Dadasaheb Phalke (6), Mumbai Marg, Navin Asha Chs, Vs. Dada (East), Mumbai 400014 (Pan: Aaupw9953G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ketan Vajani, Ca Revenue : Shri Sushil B. Shendge, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1080005281(1), Dated 26.08.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income Tax Officer, Ward 21(1)(5), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 27.12.2018 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Appeals) - Nfac, Hereinafter Referred To As The "Cit (A)", Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant Ex-Parte. The Appellant Respectfully Submits That The Notice Dated 10-7-2025 Remained Non-Complied Only On Account Of Non-Communication Of The Same To The Appellant. The Appellant Submits That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing The Appeal Order Without Any Further Notice To The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Vajani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sushil B. Shendge, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

DCIT Circle 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Championx Dai-Ichi India Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 5779/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2017-18 Dcit, Circle-1(1)(1), Championx Dai-Ichi India Room No. 533, Private Limited, 5Th Floor, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Liberty Building, Aayakar Bhavan, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, Mumbai-400020. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aaacb0474E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rushabh Mehta For Revenue : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-02-2026 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

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

Narrotam Morarjee Institute of Shipping, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)Ward 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5559/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Narrotam Morarjee Institute Of National Faceless Shipping, Mumbai Assessment Appeal Centre 76 – Jolly Maker, Chambers – 2, (Nfac) Office Of The Vs. Vivek Shah, Mumbai, Nariman Commissioner Of Income Point S.O.-400021 Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit(A) Delhi (Pan : Aaatn0042R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate Revenue : Shri Leyaqat Ali Afaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.02.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025- 26/1078465227(1) Dated 14.07.2025 Passed Against The Penalty Order U/S. 270A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), For Ay 2018-19. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre, Delhi ["The Cit (A)") U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ["The Act For Short Erred In Confirming The Penalty U/S 270A Of The Act Passed

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Afaqui, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 250Section 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

M/S. Armstrong Energy Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT 6(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3395/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarm/S Armstrong Energy Pvt. Vs. Dcit 6(1) (1), Mumbai Ltd. Room No. 504, 5Th 5Th Floor, Militia Apartment, Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mathur Pakhadi Road, M.K. Road, Mazgaon, Mumbai 400020 Mumbai - 400010 Pan/Gir No. Aafca3807R (Applicant) (Respondent) Acit 6(1) (1), Mumbai Vs. M/S Armstrong Energy Pvt. Room No. 504, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 5Th Floor, Militia Road, Apartment, Mathur Mumbai 400020 Pakhadi Road, Mazgaon, Mumbai - 400010 Pan/Gir No. Aafca3807R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nishit Gandhi Revenue By Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing 10.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: M/S. Armstrong Energy Pvt. Ltd.

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

present case and the legal position discussed above, we find that the assessment order in the instant case was admittedly framed under Section 143(3) of the Act and not under Section 144 of the Act. Therefore, the proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of the Act, even after ... Revenue, no challenge has been raised on this aspect. 10. We also noticed that the assessment for AY 2009-10 was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 31.03.2015, i.e., prior in time to the impugned reassessment order for AY 2008-09, which was passed under

Raj Sharadkumar Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 3290/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Priyanka Jain, Shri Pankaj Soni & Shri Rohan MittalFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad (CIT DR)

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

ACIT-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Armstrong Energy Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2940/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

Tin Tar Retail Corp, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm.of Income Tax -Circle 17(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6487/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

Grounds: ITA No.6487/Mum/2024, AY 2017-18 “1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the validity of order passed under section 143(3) of the Act which is invalid and void ab initio. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowing ... this year, two appeals are arising before the Tribunal viz., ΙΤΑ No.6487/Mum/2024 which is arising from assessment order dated 22.12.2019 passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act (the Act) and appeal being ITA No.6485/Mum/2024 arising from assessment order dated 12.06.2021 passed under section 153A

Tin Tar Retail Corp, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6486/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

Tin Tar Retail Corp, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle -4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6485/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 37(1)

Elan Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 763/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

Section 131Section 153CSection 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT

Rajiv Parkash Mahna, Darbhanga, Bihar vs. ITO Ward 69(8) Delhi, ITO Ward Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3971/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalasstt. Year : 2012-13 Rajiv Parkash Mahna, Vs. Ito, Ward 69(8), Rajiv Parkash Mahna Security New Delhi Agency, 1St Floor, Above Manglam Tyre House, Lalbagh Bela More, Darbhanga-846004 Bihar (Pan: Aaapm3288Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH

Mukul Rohatgi, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 61(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2427/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Shri Sachit Jolly, Senior Advocate

Section 112ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 24Section 263

Delhi-12 (hereinafter referred to as 'PCIT') for the assessment year 2020-21. Assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer of NFAC under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act vide Order dated 28th September, 2022. 2. The assessee is a designated Senior Advocate and practices ... before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Original assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act, whereby, the Assessing Officer assessed the assessee at an income of ₹133,46,92,080/- after making addition of *44,77,708/- on account

Rajeev Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1315/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 153ASection 153DSection 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT

Rajeev Aggarwal, Faridabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1314/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 153ASection 153DSection 69

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT

Amit Goyal HUF, New Delhi vs. The Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

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

ITA 1159/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2015-16 Amit Goyal Huf, Vs. Income Tax Officer, M-59, Greater Kailash-Ii, Ward 30(1), Civic Centre, New Delhi – 110 048 New Delhi (Pan: Aalha3711R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Krishna Kumar Ramawat, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar Ramawat, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “A’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Noida vs. Shiv Shakti Constructions, Greater Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 578/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalasstt. Year: 2021-22 Shiv Shakti Constructions Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Incom- A-142, Omaxe, Nri City, Pari Tax Chowk, Greater Noida, Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gautam Budh Nagar-201306, Uttar Pradesh Sector-33 Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aazfs6406R & Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Incom- Vs Shiv Shakti Constructions Tax A-142, Omaxe, Nri City, Pari Central Circle-Ii, Chowk, Greater Noida, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gautam Budh Nagar-201306, Sector-33 Uttar Pradesh Noida-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aazfs6406R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Rajinder Kaur, CIT (DR)

Section 132Section 143(3)

ITA No. 34/D/2023: Shiv Shakti Constructions VS DCIT, & ITA No. 578/DEL/2023: DCIT VS Shiv Shakti Constructions IN THE INCOME TAX

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Jindal Pipes Ltd, Delhi

ITA 3926/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi, dated 17.10.2023 against the assessment order dated 27.09.2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act') pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee