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)

ITO, WD-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Sudha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 437/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11 Ito Ward-12(1), V/S. M/S Sudha Jewellers Pvt. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Ltd., 2/1A Garia Hat Chowringhee Square, Road, Kolkata-19 Kolkta-69 [Pan No.Aadcs 6713 N] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Kalyan Nath, Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-10-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-12-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 22.12.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Ito Ward-12(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 04.03.2015 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By The Treating The Impounded Incriminating Document Found In Course Of Survey In Case Of The Assessee, As Dumb Document For Its Evidentiary Whereas, The Onus Is On The Assessee To Prove The Nature Of Entries Made In That Particular Document With Supporting Evidences Which The Assessee Failed. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Overlooking The Fact That The Incriminating Paper, Found In Course Of Survey, Was Meant For Calculation Of Advance Tax, But The Ad Observed That The Assessee Had Not Made This Paper For Correct Payment Of Taxes. 3. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Not Appreciating The Fact That The Ad Allowed The Claim Of The Assessee For

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

M/S Rb Polymers Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

ITA 202/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.202/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Rb Polymers Ltd. Vs. Cit(A)-2, Kolkata 25, R.N. Mukherjee Road, 4Th Aayakarbhawan, P-7, Floor, Suite-F, Kolkata – 1. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr 3117 R (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate. राज"वक"ओरसे /Respondent By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16/11/2017 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2009-10, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata, In Appeal No.1386/Cit(A)-2/Cir-4/2014- 15, Dated 22.12.2015, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2011. 2.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1.That The Impugned Order Dated 22Nd December 2015 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax,(Appeals) - 2 Is Liable To Be Quashed Since It Has Been Passed In Haste Without Application Of Mind & Without Considering The Evidences Furnished & Submissions Made By The Appellant In Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 32

ITO, WD-35(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Nidhi Sulphonates, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 618/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A. No. 618/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Wd-35(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………………………...Appellant Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7Th Floor, 110, Shanti Palli, Kolkata - 700107 M/S. Nidhi Sulphonates.………………………………………...............Respondent 46-C, J.L. Nehru Road, 12Th Floor, Suite – 12C, Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aadfn0495K] I.T.A. No. 378/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Nidhi Sulphonates.………………………………………...............Respondent 46-C, J.L. Nehru Road, 12Th Floor, Suite – 12C, Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aadfn0495K] Ito, Wd-35(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………………………...Appellant Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7Th Floor, 110, Shanti Palli, Kolkata - 700107 Appearances By: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Raj Kumar Agarwal, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 15, 2017 Order Per Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee, Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 10, Kolkata Order Dated 23.01.2015 For The A.Y. 2010-11. 2 I.T.A. Nos. 618 & 378/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nidhi Sulphonates

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Nidhi Sulphonates, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-35(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 378/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A. No. 618/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Wd-35(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………………………...Appellant Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7Th Floor, 110, Shanti Palli, Kolkata - 700107 M/S. Nidhi Sulphonates.………………………………………...............Respondent 46-C, J.L. Nehru Road, 12Th Floor, Suite – 12C, Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aadfn0495K] I.T.A. No. 378/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Nidhi Sulphonates.………………………………………...............Respondent 46-C, J.L. Nehru Road, 12Th Floor, Suite – 12C, Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aadfn0495K] Ito, Wd-35(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………………………...Appellant Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 7Th Floor, 110, Shanti Palli, Kolkata - 700107 Appearances By: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Raj Kumar Agarwal, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 11, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 15, 2017 Order Per Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee, Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 10, Kolkata Order Dated 23.01.2015 For The A.Y. 2010-11. 2 I.T.A. Nos. 618 & 378/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nidhi Sulphonates

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)