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)

Vijay Anant Niwate, Raigad vs. ITO WD 4, Raigad

In the result, the appeals are being ITA No

ITA 370/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vijay Anant Niwate, Ito, Ward-4, G-03, Vinayak Apartment, Suyog Vs. Panvel, Dist-Raigad. Nagar, Dahiwali, Tal-Karjat, District-Raigad, Panvel. Pan/Gir No.: Acdpn1078Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Phadkar (AR)For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 161

Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3)(Erstwhile Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed in part

ITA 3466/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh
Section 132Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3)(Erstwhile Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed in part

ITA 3465/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh
Section 132Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Mangal Prabhat Lodha, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3) Erstwhile Ce Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed in part

ITA 3458/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh
Section 132Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Mangal Prabhat Lodha, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3) Erstwhile Ce Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed in part

ITA 3457/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh
Section 132Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Mangal Prabhat Lodha, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3) Erstwhile Ce Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed in part

ITA 3456/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh
Section 132Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7588/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7587/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)