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)

M/S. Jyoti Construction, Keonjhar vs. Principal CIT, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 188/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.188/Ctk/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2011-2012) M/S Jyoti Construction, Barbil, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Keonjhar Sambalpur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfj 8820 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyajit Nanda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh, Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 15.03.2016, Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Sole Substantive Ground Raised By The Assessee That The Order Passed By Ld.Cit Is Without Merit & Does Not Satisfy The Twin Conditions Required Under The Law. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Engaged In Contract Works & Filed The Return Of Income Electronically On 19.10.2011 With Total Income Of Rs.70,67,777/-. Subsequently Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notices U/S.143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Compliance, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared & Case Was Discussed & Produced Financial Statements. Ld. Ao After Verifying The Various Documents Found That The Assessee Has Not Paid The Statutory Liability Before The Due Date Of Filing Of 2 Return Of Income U/S.139() Of The Act & Disallowed U/S.43B Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri Satyajit Nanda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CITDR
Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 263Section 40Section 43B

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Kalinga Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 250/CTK/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.250/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-2008) Dcit, Cir-1(1), Bhubaneswar Vs. M/S Kalinga Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd., M-10, Samanta Vihar, Nalco Square, Near Kalinga Hospital, Bhubaneswar-751017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack 7224 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 21/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Berhampur (Camp: Bhubaneswar), Dated 21.03.2014, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0226/10-11(Bbs), U/S.143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2007-2008, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Accepting The Contention Of The Assessee & Deleting The Addition Of Rs.7,14,20,259/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Unexplained Advance Against Share Capital. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, Neither Any Adjournment Application Was Placed On Record By The Assessee, Therefore, The Bench Deem It Fit Dispose Off The 2 Appeal On The Basis Of Material Available On Record & The Submissions

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh,CITDR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

Odisha Power Generation Corporation Ltd, Bhubaneswar vs. CIT, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 216/CTK/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.216/Ctk/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) M/S Odisha Power Generation Vs. Cit, Bhubaneswar, 7Th Corporation Ltd., Floor, Fortune Tower, Bhubaneswar- 751023 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco 1759 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Dillip Ku. Mohanty & Shri Bhagaban Panda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kunal Singh,Citdr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/08/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Company Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit, Bhubaneswar, Passed U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2009-2010 & Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. For That The Notice Issued By The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bhubaneswar (Cit) Under Section 263 Of The I.T. Act, 196L (The Act) Are Bad In Law, Void Ab Initio & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. For That The Order Dated 24.03.2014 Passed By The Learned Cit Under Section 263 Of The Act Is Bad In Law, Void Ab Initio & Is Liable To Be Cancelled.. 3. For That The Cit Has Erred In Invoking His Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Act Without Satisfying The Pre-Conditions Necessary For Assumption Of Such Jurisdiction & Therefore The Order U/S. 263 Are Liable To Be Set Aside Only On This Ground. 4. For That The Finding Of The Cit In The Order U /S. 263 In Respect Of The Two Issues/ Grounds Are Nothing But A Direction To The Ld. A.O. For Substituting His Own Opinion With That Of The Assessing Officer Or For Making A Fishing & Roving Enquiry Are Not A Case Of Erroneous Order & Nevertheless, It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. The Order

For Appellant: Shri Dillip Ku. MohantyFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh,CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)