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 Rahul Premier India Agency Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2002/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2002/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2011-2012) M/S Rahul Premier India Vs. Ito, Ward-4(4), Agency Private Limited, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 234/3A, Ajc Bose Road, Chowringhee Square, 5Th Floor, Suite No.A-4, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata -700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcr 2687 I .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate Revenue By : Md. Ghyas Uddin, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 04/01/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata, In Appeal No.1320/Cit(A)-2/14-15, Dated 26.07.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 03.03.2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2012 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.23,95,270/-. Asessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Various Additions. 3. Aggrieved From The Order Of The Ao, Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Cit(A), Who Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee On M/S Rahul Premier India Agency Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Ghyas Uddin, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 249

Shri Haradhan Mondal, South 24 Parganas vs. ITO, WD-53(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1936/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1936/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2011-2012) Shri Haradhan Mondal, Vs. Ito, Ward-53(4) (Now, Wd Purushottampur, 26(4), Kolkata Bagbazaar, Sagar, South 24 Parganas, Pin-743373 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajipm 9666 M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/01/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2011-2012, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata, In Appeal No.541/Cit(A)-7/Kol/Wd-26(4)/14-15, Dated 19.08.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 14.03.2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Of Rs.4,90,030/-, On Dated 10/03/2012. The Assessee Had Derived His Income From Selling Of Fish. The Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition @5% Estimated The Net Profit On Turnover At Rs.15,87,932/-. 3. Aggrieved From The Order Of The Ao, Assessee Filed An Appeal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 144

Shri Sumit Saha, Kolkata vs. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee on this ground, is allowed

ITA 1569/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1569/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2011-2012) Sumit Saha, Vs. Ito-1(4) Hooghly, Presently 48/1, Old Nimta Road, Ito23(4), Chinsurah, Gt Kolkata-700058 Road, Hooghly-712101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ayyps 5395 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.M.Roy,Fca Revenue By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 28/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2011-2012, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata, In Appeal No.254/Cit(A)-6/Kol/2014-15, Dated 29.06.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.03.2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 24.07.2011 Declaring Net Income Of Rs.9,99,740/-. The Assessee Also Claimed Deduction U/S.24(B) Of The Act At Rs.1.50 Lakhs In Respect Of Interest Paid On Housing Loan. The Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition Of Rs.1.50 Lakhs On Account Of Interest On House Building Loan, Rs.9,52,347/- As Undisclosed Income & Rs.7918/- As Undisclosed Bank Interest.

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Roy,FCAFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 24

Biwanath Lohia, Kolkata vs. The ITO, WD-48(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1289/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1289/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-2007) Biswanath Lohia, Huf, Vs. Ito, Ward-48 (3), 171/1, Jn Mukherjee Road, 3, Govt. Place(W) Salkia, Howrah-6, Kolkata-700001 C/O: Sri Jitendra Kaushik, Advocate, 19-D, Muktaram Babu Street, Kolkata-700007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaehb 6352 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nirmal Kaushik, Advocate Revenue By : Md. Ghyas Uddin, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05/01/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2006-07, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata, In Appeal No.15/Cit(A)-14Wd-47(3)/2011-12, Dated 28.04.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3)/154 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.03.2011. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 8.11.2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,05,810/-. Asessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making Various Additions. Later On, The Assessing Officer Passed The Rectification Order Under Section 154 Of The Act Observing That Deduction U/S 24(A) Of The I.T. Act Was Wrongly Allowed To The Assessee. Assessing Officer Observed That The Assessee Is Not Owner Of Any House Property & An Amount Received By The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Ghyas Uddin, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 24

Metropolitan Engg. Co-Opt Society Ltd., Nadia vs. JCIT, RG.Nadia, Nadia

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

ITA 405/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.405/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2007-2008) M/S Metropolitan Engg. Co-Operative Vs. Jcit, Range-Nadia Society Limited, C/O. P.S.Gupta(Advocate) 100, Bank Lane, Hatar Para P.O. Krishnagar, Dist-Nadia, Pin-741101 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefm 4520 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.S.Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Md. Ghyas Uddin, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 04/01/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2007-08, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata, In Appeal No.995/Cit(A)-Xxxvi/Kol/Jcit, Range, Nadia/09-10, Dated 31.12.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated, 18.12.2009. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.26,54,071/-. Assessee’S Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3) By Making Various Additions. 3. Aggrieved From The Order Of The Ao, Assessee Filed An Appeal

For Appellant: Shri P.S.Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Ghyas Uddin, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40