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)

ACIT, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Swosti Premium Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 91/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.91/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S Swosti Premium Ltd., Bhubaneswar P-1, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No. : Aadcs 8693 K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sumanta Kumar Nayak, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23/03/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar Dated 02.11.2016 On The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Law As Well As On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.17,03,000/- On Account Of Difference In Closing Stock. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Law As Well As Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,06,26,000/- On Account Of Difference In Sundry Debtors. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Lodging, Boarding & Restaurant & Filed Return Of Income On 19.03.2015 By Disclosing Total Income At Nil For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. Subsequently The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S.143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued To The Assessee. In Compliance, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared From Time To Time Along With Relevant Documents. The Ao Found That In The Inventories Disclosed Under The Head Current Assets, Loans & Advances In Schedule 5 Of The Balance Sheet Closing

For Appellant: Shri Sumanta Kumar Nayak, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Mega Bolloywood P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 21, Mumbai

ITA 3377/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Ravish Soodआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3377/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2005-06 वष" M/S. Mega Bollywood Pvt.Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle-3(3) The Plaza, 11Th Floor, 55, Gamdevi 19Th Floor, Air India Building Vs. Mumbai-400 007. Mumbai-400 021. Pan:Aaacy 0507 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Darshani Gohil-Dr Assessee By: Shri Purushottam Kumar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/12//2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12/03/2018 आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" अिधिनयम क" क" धारा क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य ,राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra,Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 29/04/2016 Of The Cit(A)-51, Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,A World-Right-Controller Of Various Films & Financer Of Films,Filed Its Return Of Income On 31/10/2005,Declaring Loss Of Rs.1.38 Crores.The Assess- Ing Officer(Ao)Completed The Assessment On 19/12/2007 U/S. 143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs.61.57 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Shri Purushottam KumarFor Respondent: Shri Darshani Gohil-DR
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)