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)

Kishan Gopal Mohta, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-35, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 182/KOL/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11 Kishan Gopal Mohta V/S. Acit, Circle-35, Aayakar 7, Lyons Range, 2Nd Floor, Bhawan, P-7, Room No. 2A, Kolkata-001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Adqpm 0469 E] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri P.J. Bhide, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G. Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 01-03-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata Dated 04.04.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-35, Kolkata U/S 263/154/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 26.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2010-11 & Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Erred In Holding That The Assessing Officer Was Justified In Invoking The Provision Of Section 14A Of The Act. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.94,89,504/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S. 14A Of The Act. 3. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, Erred In Holding That

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 263

Maniga Jewellery, Coimbatore vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1692/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1692/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 M/S. Maniga Jewellery The Assistant Commissioner Of Represented By Its Erstwhile Partner Vs. Income Tax, Smt. A. Deepa, No. 208, Gowtham Non Corporate Circle 2, Arcade, 2Nd Floor, T V Samy Road, Coimbatore. R.S. Puram, Coimbatore 641 002. [Pan: Aaofm5053D] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Vijayaprabha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Coimbatore, Dated 31.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. Besides Raising Various Grounds In The Grounds Of Appeal, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Mainly Argued That The Assessee Was Not Given Sufficient

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Vijayaprabha, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A