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)

Idbi Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2193/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2193/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Idbi Bank Ltd. Asst. Cit, Large Tax Payers Unit, बनाम/ 28Th Floor, Centre-1, Wtc Complex, Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, 7Th Floor, Taxation Cell, Cuffee Parade, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005 Vs. Mumbai-400 005 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci 1105 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Satish Modi ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. C. S. Naik & Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnoo सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.3.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 16.6.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order By The Ld. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai Dated 12.12.2012 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2004-05, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R/W S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. In The Ground So Raised, The Assessee Is Aggrieved For Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Disallowance Made U/S. 14A While Computing Book Profit U/S.115Jb Of The Act. The Assessee Is Also Aggrieved For Interest Levied U/S. 234D Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModiFor Respondent: Shri B. C. S. Naik &
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 211Section 234DSection 40

Joynest Prremises P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6717/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 6717/Mum/2014 & आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 6718/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) वष" Joynest Premises Pvt. Ltd. Ito, 5(3)(4), R. No.565 बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Cts No.469-A, Near Jain Temple, Aayakar Bhavan, R.C. Marg, Chembur, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 071. Mumbai-400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacz 3360M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Asghar Zain सुनवाई क" तारीख / : 08/06/2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तारीख / : 15.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Above Titled Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Of Even Date 14.08.2014 Relevant To A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Asghar Zain
Section 143