Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(3) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 143(3) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 75,154 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

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.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Judgments on Section 143(3)

Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Rajkot

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

ITA 1000/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1000/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2022-23 ] Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Soham, 2B-9, Ganesh Park-1, Income Tax Office, 5Th Floor, New Vs. Near Mama Saheb Temple, Raiya Aayakar Bhawan, Rajkot, Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360007 Gujarat-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Asgpj4670B (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am : Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2022-23, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 19.05.2026 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The Act, Dated 02.02.2024. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee, In This Appeal, Is That Assessing Officer Disallowed, Loss From House Property Of Rs. 2,00,000/-, The Deduction Of Rs. 1,50,000/- Under Section 80C & A Specific Amount Of Deduction Of Rs. 13,437/- Under Section 80D Of The Act. That Is, Assessing Officer Finalized The

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 80CSection 80D

Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2026

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Shri Tapas Ram Misravikas Ashokkumar Masand, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Oil Petrol Pump, Income Tax, Nr. Manav Mandir, Circle 3(1)(1), Drive-In Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380052. [Pan : Acbpa3190 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Ms Ridhi Masani, Ca On Behalf Of Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar Respondent Represented By: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.10.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.10.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:- This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.07.2026 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Dated 16.07.2026 Is Bad In Law, Contrary To The Facts On Record, Contrary To The Settled Judicial Precedents & Is Passed Without Properly Appreciating The Evidence & Submissions Placed Before Him & Therefore Requires To Be Set Aside. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 34,40,123/-Made By The Learned Assessing Officer Under Section 69A Of The Act, When The Very

Section 115BSection 131Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

Infra Developers, Shivpuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ashoknagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 454/AGR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15 Infra Developers, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Narendra Nagar, Shivpuri (Mp)- Ashoknagar (Mp)-473331 473551 Pan :Aabfi5834R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Sharma, Advocate & Shri Manuj Sharma, Advocate Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.10.2026 Order Per : Brajesh Kumar Singh: This Appeal Is Directed Against The Impugned Order Dated 26.03.2026 Passed In Appeal No. Nfac/2013-14/10151758 By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)] U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) For The A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed Assessee’S Appeal. 2. In This Case, The Original Assessment U/S. 143(3) Was Completed On 14.07.2016, Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 9,50,000/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.8,46,040/-. Subsequently, The Assessment Was Reopened Vide Notice U/S. 148 Of The Act Dated 30.03.2021 On The Ground That The Assessee Had Made Payment Exceeding Rs. 20,000/- In Cash In One Day Amounting To Rs. 20,19,400/- In Violation Of Section 40A (3) Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 250Section 40ASection 40A(3)