← All Phrases

“Section 145(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 145Section 145(3)2,270 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 145(3) is CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 254), cited in 968 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 145(3)

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 363 · 1971 · Supreme Court
654
citing judgments

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT
37 ITR 288 · 1959 · Supreme Court
570
citing judgments

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
58 ITD 428 · 1996 · ITAT
430
citing judgments

Where purchases are found to be non-genuine or fictitious, a reasonable disallowance of 25% of such purchases or the peak credit, whichever is higher, can be made. This is applied to address unexplained expenditure under Section 69C when actual goods are likely procured from the grey market.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
372 ITR 619 · 2015 · High Court
391
citing judgments

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

Kachwala Gems v. JCIT
288 ITR 10 · 2007 · Supreme Court
332
citing judgments

In a best judgment assessment, some guesswork is inherent, but the estimate must be fair and not arbitrary. Books of account can be rejected under Section 145(3) if the assessee fails to substantiate entries or prove the genuineness of transactions, leading to estimation of income.

Judgments citing Section 145(3)

Eeh Eff Brothers, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Srinagar

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 441/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 441/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessmentyear: 2017-18) M/S Eeh Eff Brothers Ito बनाम/ Vs. Sarai Payeen Amirakadal Ward-1 Srinagar (J&K) Srinagar. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfe-1269-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone (Ca) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 07-06- 2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 26-12-2019. The Sole Grievance Of The Assessee-Firm Is Estimation Of Business Income. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-

For Appellant: Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone (CA) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar vs. Smt. Jyoti Saroop Grover, Malout

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 434/ASR/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Dcit - Central Circle (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) Amritsar बनाम/ Vs. Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Punjab-143001 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 434/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit - Central Circle Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Amritsar (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) बनाम/ Vs. Punjab-143001 Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Jyoti Saroop Grover Prop. Ms Sant Metal Industries Sekhu Road, Ward 7 Malout, Punjab vs. The AO NFAC Delhi Jurisdictional AO the ACIT Central Circle Amritsar, Punjab

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 335/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Dcit - Central Circle (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) Amritsar बनाम/ Vs. Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Punjab-143001 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 434/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit - Central Circle Ms. Jyoti Saroop Grover Amritsar (Prop. Ms. Sant Metal Industries) बनाम/ Vs. Punjab-143001 Sekhu Road, Ward No 7 Malout, Punjab – 152 107 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ajrpg-8929-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 69C

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Bathinda

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 750/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.713/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -1 3020, Street No 8 बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana-141001 Ajit Road, Bhatinda 151001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-8616-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.750/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit-Central Circle -1 M/S Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Ludhiana-141001 बनाम/ Vs. 3020 Street No 8 Ajit Road, Bhatinda 151001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-8616-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Vinay Bahl (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Bahl (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON

Sibia Healthcare Pvt Ltd, Bhatinda vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 713/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.713/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -1 3020, Street No 8 बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana-141001 Ajit Road, Bhatinda 151001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-8616-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.750/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit-Central Circle -1 M/S Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Ludhiana-141001 बनाम/ Vs. 3020 Street No 8 Ajit Road, Bhatinda 151001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-8616-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Vinay Bahl (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Bahl (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON