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)

Hindustan Ice Cold Storage Co Ltd, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T, Cir- 8, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 203/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.203/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-2007) Hindusthan Ice & Cold Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Kolkata Storage Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, C/O D.J.Shah & Co., Chowringhee Square, Kalyan Bhavan, Kolkata-69 2 Elgin Road, Kolkata-20 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 6265 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2006-2007, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxii, Kolkata In Appeal No.32/Xxxii/11-12/R&T/Cir-8/Kol, Dated 07.11.2012, 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 28.11.2008. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its The Return Of Income On 27.11.2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,45,711/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S. 143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition On Account Of Revenue Expenditure Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Repairs & Replacement Of Block Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Ramakant Gaggar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1290/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.1287 To 1290/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Ramakant Gaggar Tax- Central Circle-8(1), 302, Gaurav Aprt, Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Gokuldham, Aayakar Bhavan, Goreaon (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400063 Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी /Appellant प्रत्मथी /Respondent .. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./Pan :Abkpg9952C अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Santanu Kr.Saikia प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 8.11.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2016 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Directed Against The Orders Dated 12.12.2014 For The Assessment Year 2006-07 & Order Dated 02.12.2014 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 Respectively Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai. Since These Appeals Are Filed Against The Same Assessee & The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Therefore For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, These Appeals Were Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Santanu KR.SaikiaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 254(1)

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Ramakant Gaggar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1289/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.1287 To 1290/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Ramakant Gaggar Tax- Central Circle-8(1), 302, Gaurav Aprt, Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Gokuldham, Aayakar Bhavan, Goreaon (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400063 Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी /Appellant प्रत्मथी /Respondent .. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./Pan :Abkpg9952C अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Santanu Kr.Saikia प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 8.11.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2016 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Directed Against The Orders Dated 12.12.2014 For The Assessment Year 2006-07 & Order Dated 02.12.2014 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 Respectively Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai. Since These Appeals Are Filed Against The Same Assessee & The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Therefore For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, These Appeals Were Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Santanu KR.SaikiaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 254(1)

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Ramakant Gaggar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1288/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.1287 To 1290/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Ramakant Gaggar Tax- Central Circle-8(1), 302, Gaurav Aprt, Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Gokuldham, Aayakar Bhavan, Goreaon (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400063 Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी /Appellant प्रत्मथी /Respondent .. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./Pan :Abkpg9952C अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Santanu Kr.Saikia प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 8.11.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2016 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Directed Against The Orders Dated 12.12.2014 For The Assessment Year 2006-07 & Order Dated 02.12.2014 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 Respectively Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai. Since These Appeals Are Filed Against The Same Assessee & The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Therefore For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, These Appeals Were Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Santanu KR.SaikiaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 254(1)

DCIT Cen Cir 8(1), Mumbai vs. Ramakant Gaggar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1287/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.1287 To 1290/Mum/2015 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Ramakant Gaggar Tax- Central Circle-8(1), 302, Gaurav Aprt, Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Gokuldham, Aayakar Bhavan, Goreaon (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400063 Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी /Appellant प्रत्मथी /Respondent .. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./Pan :Abkpg9952C अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Santanu Kr.Saikia प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 8.11.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2016 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: These Are Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Directed Against The Orders Dated 12.12.2014 For The Assessment Year 2006-07 & Order Dated 02.12.2014 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 Respectively Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai. Since These Appeals Are Filed Against The Same Assessee & The Issues Involved Therein Are Common & Therefore For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, These Appeals Were Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Santanu KR.SaikiaFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 254(1)