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)

DCIT, Cuttack vs. Kamlesh Kumar Jain, Jajpur

Appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 412/CTK/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.412/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-2009) Dcit,Circle-1(1), Cuttack Vs. Shri Kamlesh Kumar Jain, Prop M/S. Jain Transport, Chandikhole, Jajpur स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aejpj 7984 H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.K.Mohapatra, Citdr धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Passed In Itappeal No.077/2014-15, Dated 20.07.2015, U/S.147/143(3) R.W.S.250 Of The Income Tax Act. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Sole Substantive Ground That The Cit(A) Erred In Considering The Assessee’S Submissions & Has Not Called For The Remand Report & Comments From The Ao Which Are In Violation Of Provisions Of Rules 46A Of The I.T.Rules. 3. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing. However, An Adjournment Application Was Placed On Record By The Assessee Seeking For Adjournment Of Hearing On The Ground That Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Is Suffering From High Fever & Would Not Be Able To Attend The Same, Which, In Our Considered Opinion, Is Not A Plausible One And, Thus, We Reject The Application & Proceed To Dispose

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

M/S. Kalinga Mining Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Cuttack vs. JCIT, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 405/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Ctk/2014 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/S Kalinga Mining Vs. Ito (Tds), Shelter Chhak, Corporation, Samanta Cuttack Niwas, Seikh Bazar, Cuttack-753008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aadck 6791 N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.405/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) M/S Kalinga Mining Vs. Jcit, Range-Ii, Cuttack Corporation, Samanta Niwas, Seikh Bazar, Cuttack-753008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aadck 6791 N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal I.E. Ita No.469/Ctk/2014 (Ay 2013-2014) Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 29.9.2014 Passed U/S.206C(6)(6A)&(7) Of The I.T.Act & Also Appeal In Ita No.405/Ctk/2015 Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 20.07.2015 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Placed On Record By The Assessee. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, We

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, CITDR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 260C(1)

DCIT, Sambalpur vs. M/S. L.N. Infrastructure & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Bargarh

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 233/CTK/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jul 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.233/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Vs. M/S L.N.Infrastructure & Construction Pvt. Ltd., At-Padampur, Dist- Bargarh स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcl 3028 R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan, Dr धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Binod Kumar Agrawal,Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Passed In Ita No.0478/2013-14, Dated 20.2.2015, U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The & Substantive Ground That The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition As Disallowed By The Ao In The Absence Of Bills & Vouchers For Expenses Towards Earth, Murrom & Sand & For Stones Products. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Execution Of Contract Works & Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-2011 On 24.09.2010 With Total Income Of Rs.99,91,910/- & The Return Of Income Was Processed U/S.143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Through Cass & The Ld. Ao Issued Notices U/S.143(2) &

For Appellant: Shri Binod Kumar Agrawal,ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S. Kalinga Mining Corporation, Cuttack vs. ITO, TDS, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 469/CTK/2014[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jul 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.469/Ctk/2014 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/S Kalinga Mining Vs. Ito (Tds), Shelter Chhak, Corporation, Samanta Cuttack Niwas, Seikh Bazar, Cuttack-753008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aadck 6791 N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.405/Ctk/2015 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) M/S Kalinga Mining Vs. Jcit, Range-Ii, Cuttack Corporation, Samanta Niwas, Seikh Bazar, Cuttack-753008 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aadck 6791 N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) धनधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal I.E. Ita No.469/Ctk/2014 (Ay 2013-2014) Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 29.9.2014 Passed U/S.206C(6)(6A)&(7) Of The I.T.Act & Also Appeal In Ita No.405/Ctk/2015 Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 20.07.2015 Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When The Matter Was Called For Hearing, Nor Any Adjournment Application Was Placed On Record By The Assessee. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, We

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, CITDR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 206CSection 206C(6)Section 260C(1)