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)

Dayal Tahilram Parwani, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3545/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3194/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Cit-19(3), Dayal Tahilram Parwani बनाम/ Room No. 305, 3Rd Floor, 4Th Floor, Brijbala Building, 21St Road, Bandra (W), Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpp 6013 C (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3545/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Dayal Tahilram Parwani Dy. Cit-19(3), Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 012 Vs. ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) : राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Jasbir S. Chauhanlove Kumar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 18.09.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are The Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & Revenue, Arising Out Of The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26-2-2013, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 26-12-2011. 2

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir S. ChauhanLove Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 50Section 50CSection 54E

DCIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Dayal Tahilram Parwanian Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3194/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3194/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Cit-19(3), Dayal Tahilram Parwani बनाम/ Room No. 305, 3Rd Floor, 4Th Floor, Brijbala Building, 21St Road, Bandra (W), Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpp 6013 C (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3545/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बनाम/ Dayal Tahilram Parwani Dy. Cit-19(3), Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 012 Vs. ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) : राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Jasbir S. Chauhanlove Kumar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 18.09.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are The Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & Revenue, Arising Out Of The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 26-2-2013, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 26-12-2011. 2

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir S. ChauhanLove Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 50Section 50CSection 54E

Pathare Prabhu Co Op Hsg Soc.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 256/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.5524-5526&128/Mum/2012 Pathare Prabhu Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Vs. Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Plot No.340, Prabhu Nagar, 12Th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai- 400052 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaap 4549 G (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 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 2003-04 To 2006-07 & 2008- 09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Heard & Are Now Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Registered Cooperative Housing Society Assessed To Tax Before The Ito Ward-15(2)(2), Mumbai. In The A.Y.2003- 04 The Ao Issued A Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Pursuant To The Order Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Pathare Prabhu Co Op Hsg Soc Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5526/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.5524-5526&128/Mum/2012 Pathare Prabhu Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Vs. Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Plot No.340, Prabhu Nagar, 12Th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai- 400052 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaap 4549 G (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 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 2003-04 To 2006-07 & 2008- 09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Heard & Are Now Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Registered Cooperative Housing Society Assessed To Tax Before The Ito Ward-15(2)(2), Mumbai. In The A.Y.2003- 04 The Ao Issued A Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Pursuant To The Order Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Pathare Prabhu Co Op Hsg Soc Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5525/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.5524-5526&128/Mum/2012 Pathare Prabhu Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Vs. Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Plot No.340, Prabhu Nagar, 12Th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai- 400052 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaap 4549 G (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 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 2003-04 To 2006-07 & 2008- 09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Heard & Are Now Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Registered Cooperative Housing Society Assessed To Tax Before The Ito Ward-15(2)(2), Mumbai. In The A.Y.2003- 04 The Ao Issued A Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Pursuant To The Order Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Pathare Prabhu Co Op Hsg Soc Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5524/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.5524-5526&128/Mum/2012 Pathare Prabhu Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Vs. Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Plot No.340, Prabhu Nagar, 12Th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai- 400052 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaap 4549 G (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 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 2003-04 To 2006-07 & 2008- 09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Heard & Are Now Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Registered Cooperative Housing Society Assessed To Tax Before The Ito Ward-15(2)(2), Mumbai. In The A.Y.2003- 04 The Ao Issued A Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Pursuant To The Order Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Pathare Prabhu Co -Op Hsg. Soc .Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 15(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 128/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.5524-5526&128/Mum/2012 Pathare Prabhu Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Vs. Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Plot No.340, Prabhu Nagar, 12Th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai- 400052 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaaap 4549 G (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vipul Joshi यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 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 2003-04 To 2006-07 & 2008- 09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Therefore, All The Appeals Were Heard & Are Now Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Registered Cooperative Housing Society Assessed To Tax Before The Ito Ward-15(2)(2), Mumbai. In The A.Y.2003- 04 The Ao Issued A Notice U/S.143(2) Of The Act Pursuant To The Order Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Sayed Ahmed Abbas Naqvi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2807/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2807 & 2808/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06) Syed Ahmed Abbas Naqvi Dy. Cit, Central Circle-2, बनाम/ 705, Sea Creast No. 2, Mumbai J. P. Road, Seven Bunglows, Vs. Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 061 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Abvpn 7551 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Girish Dave & Ms.Kadambari Dave सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.09.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: The Assessee, An Individual, Is A Mumbai Based Interior Designer. He, Along With His Wife, Muskan Naqvi, Was Subject To Search Action U/S.132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) By The Investigation Wing (Mumbai) Of The Revenue At Their Residence, On 05.01.2007, As A Part Of The Search Operations On Hasan Ali Khan (Hak) Group. The Case Was Subsequently Centralized With Central Circle-2, Mumbai On 20.03.2007 & Assessment For The Different Years Framed U/S.153A R/W S. 143(3) Of The Act. We Are In These Appeals Concerned With The Assessments For Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2004-05 & 2005-06, Made Vide Assessment Orders Dated 31.12.2008

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Girish Dave &
Section 132Section 153A