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)

Gitanjali Infratech Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

ITA 1366/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1366/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3486/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3487/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.: 2011-12 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Gitanjali Infratech Ltd. Acit, Central Circle-1(2), A-1, 7Th Floor, Laxmi Tower, G Block 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Mk Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. Pan:Aaccg 7677 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Y.K. Bhaskar-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri K. Gopal/Ms.Neha Paranjpe सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/11/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 07/02/2018 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 28/4/2016 Of The Cit(A)- 47,Mumbai,The Assessee Has Filed Present Appeals For The Above Mentioned Ay.S (Ay.S) .The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Construction Of Residential/Commercial Buildings.Details Of Filing Of Returns, Returned Incomes,Assessment Dates Etc., Can Be Summarised As Under: A.Y. Roi Filed On Returned Income Assessment Dt. Assessed Income 2008-09 3.12.2013 Rs.6,41,16,960/- 20/03/2014 Rs.6.46 Crores 2010-11 30/11/12 Rs.75,91,149/- 20/03/2014 Rs.7.77 Lakhs 2011-12 30/11/2012 Rs.31,54,224/- 20/03/2014 Rs.17.68 Lakhs

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal/Ms.Neha ParanjpeFor Respondent: Shri Y.K. Bhaskar-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 57

Ashok Kumar D. Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-9(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5965/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5965/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Shri Ashok Kumar D. Jain Ito-9(2)(1), बनाम/ 11, Unnat Nagar Chs, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mg Road, Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 062 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpj 7464 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pratik Jain ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.11.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 20.06.2017 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2006- 07. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Appellant Was Prevented By Reasonable Cause In Not Attending The Appellate Proceedings Before The Ld. Cit(A)-20, Mumbai & Thus The Ex-Parte Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Deserves To Be Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Pratik JainFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha
Section 143(3)Section 14A