← 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)

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mysore vs. Hagamilaldak Gouthamchand, Mysore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2087/BANG/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Shivanand H Kalakeri, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

ITA Nos.2087 & 2088/Bang/2024 Hagamlaldak Gouthamchand, Mysore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

Mkf International, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7726/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmkf International Dcit Circle 17(1), 1903/1905, Aarus Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Wallace Fortuna, Shivdas Vs. Bkc, Mumbai – Chapsi Marg, Opp-Fazlani 400 051 School, Chinchbunder Ho, Mumbai-400 009 Pan/Gir No. Abhfm5244N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah A/W Ms. Mitali Parekh, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.02.2026

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 68

International assessment order dated 30.09.2021 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), Mumbai[hereinafter referred to as “Assessing Officer”] under section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2018–19. Facts of the Case 2. The assessee is a partnership firm. It filed its return ... additional grounds of appeal challenging the validity of notice issued under section 143(2) and the jurisdiction of the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Act. 32. In view of the statement made at the Bar, the additional grounds are dismissed as not pressed and are, therefore

Prabhulal Kalji Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 7421/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 7421/Mum/2025 Assessment Year

Bharatkumar Gadodia, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 31(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6362/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh,Adv & Akshay Pawar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (Sr. Ar.)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 250

from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 31(1)(1), Mumbai (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act date of order 28.12.2017. 2 Bharat Kumar Gadodia 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee

Neysa Jewllery Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5934/MUM/2025[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 10ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

considered as it was not disallowed in the computation of income at the time of filing original return. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 29.07.2007 in accepting return income of Rs. 5.75 crore. As return of income as accepted, the assessee has no occasion to file further

M/S Bhagyesh A. Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19 (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5865/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh, Adv, & Akshay Pawar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69C

emanated from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-19(1), Mumbai (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act date of order 16.12.2019. 2 M/S Bhagyesh A. Patel 2. The brief facts of the case is that

Amit Prabhunath Jaiswal, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward -28(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed with cost for statistical

ITA 5280/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153CSection 68

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4913/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections

ITA 4869/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Kumar Meena, (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

Unilever India Exports Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for Assessment Years 2015–16 and 2016–17 are allowed

ITA 4157/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & Unilever India Dcit Central Exports Limited, Circle-5(2), Unilever House, B. D. Vs. Room No. 427, 4Th Sawant Marg, Floor, Kautilya Chakala, Andheri Bhawan, C-41 To C- East, Sahar P & T 43, G Block, Bandra Colony, S. O. Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 099 Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Aaaci0991D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Karishma Phatarphekara/W Shri Harsh Shah & Shri Shreyas Sardesai, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.02.2026

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 254

आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the final assessment orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) read with section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for Assessment Years ... assessment orders dated 17 April 2025 for Assessment Year 2015–16 and 25 April 2025 for Assessment Year 2016–17 were passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13), incorporating the transfer pricing adjustments. 9. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action, the assessee has filed the present appeals. Following

Unilever India Exports Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for

ITA 4156/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 254

ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the final assessment orders passed under section 143(3) read 2 ITA No. 4156 & 4157/Mum/2025 Unilever India Exports Limited with section 144C(13) read with section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter ... assessment orders dated 17 April 2025 for Assessment Year 2015-16 and 25 April 2025 for Assessment Year 2016-17 were passed under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13), incorporating the transfer pricing adjustments. 9. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action, the assessee has filed the present appeals. Following

Firstrand Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Comm. of Income Tax-Circle-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2502/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Firstrand Bank Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of C-53, G-Block, 5 Th Floor, Income-Tax, Tcg Financial Centre, Circle-2(3)(1), Bandra-Kurla Complex, Mumbai Vs. Bandra (East)., Mumbai -400051 (Pan: Aabcf1632P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Paras Savla, Advocate Revenue : Shri Annavaram K, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Final Assessment Order Passed Pursuant To The Directions Of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel- 1, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Drp/F/144C(5)/2022- 23/1043517868(1), Dated 22.06.2022, Passed U/S. 144C(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Paras Savla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram K, Sr. DR
Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC) to hold that the claim could not be entertained during assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. 15.3. Assessee submitted that while computing its total income, it had duly considered the impact of Income Computation and Disclosure Standard

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (It)-1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7487/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Australia & New Zealand Deputy Commissioner Of Banking Group Ltd. Income-Tax – 1(1)(2), Unit A, Sixth Floor, Mumbai Cnergy Centre, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Vs. Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 (Pan : Aaica3008P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue : Shri Annavaram K., Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Final Assessment Order Passed Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-1, Mumbai, (Drp) Vide Order Dated 04.09.2018 U/S. 144C(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: Ground 1: Determination Of The Arm'S Length Price (Alp) Of The International Transaction Relating To Processing Fees Received On Account Of Guarantees Issued To Indian Companies Based On Counter-Guarantee From Overseas Branches

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram K., Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH

Akansh Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-59(1), Delhi

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

ITA 6428/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’ Ble

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

6427_6428_DEL_2025_Akansh Aggarwal vs ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE

Akansh Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 59(1), Delhi

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

ITA 6427/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

6427_6428_DEL_2025_Akansh Aggarwal vs ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE

M/S C.P. & Associates(P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 5(2), Delhi

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

ITA 6379/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

6379_DEL_2025_M s C P AND ASSOCIATES PVT LTD IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-30, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Rv Cafe Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is hereby, dismissed

ITA 6363/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Harshit Srivastava, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68

case? 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in allowing the appeal in accordance with the provisions of section 153C instead of section 143(3) of the Act by considering the additional grounds? 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in allowing the appeal of the assessee ignoring

JCIT(OSD), Range-10, New Delhi, C.R. Building ITO vs. Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd., Kasturba Nagar

ITA 609/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmarec Limited, C/O D-22, Second Floor, South Extension 1, New Delhi – 110 049

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

JCIT(OSD), Range-10, New Delhi, C.R. Building ITO vs. Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd., Kasturba Nagar

ITA 579/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmarec Limited, C/O D-22, Second Floor, South Extension 1, New Delhi – 110 049

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

JCIT(OSD), Range-10, New Delhi, Cr Building ITO vs. Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd., Kasturba Nagar

ITA 578/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Taneja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swroop, CITDR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘B': NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA