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)

Totupura Bharathan Royal, Sambalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 495/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.495/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Totupura Bharatha Royal, C/O. Vs Ito, Ward -2(1), M.K.Balkrishnan, Near Rengali Sambalpur Railway Station, Rengali, Dist: Sambalpur Pan No. Bccpr 3058 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Prajnaraj Mohanty, Adv. : Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date : 01/12/2025 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A),National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 01.08.2025 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Sambalpur/10196/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, In The Matter Of Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act 2. Shri Prajnaraj Mohanty. Ld Ar Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Vijaya Singh, Ld Sr Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Ld Cit(A), Nfac Has Passed The Order Exparte Without Giving Reasonable

For Appellant: Shri Prajnaraj Mohanty, Adv
Section 143(3)

M/S. Bhagaban Mohapatra Constructions & Engineers Private Limited.D., Jagatsinghpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Cuttack

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 448/CTK/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.448/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) M/S Bhagban Mohapatra Vs Acit, Circle-1(1), Cuttack Constructions & Engineers Pvt Ltd, At-Hig-27, Gourav Vihar, Po : Paradeep, So-Bagadia, Dist : Jagatsinghpur-754142 Pan No. : Aabcb 6339 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Addl/Jcit(A)-6, Kolkata, Dated 25.06.2025, Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A), Cuttack/10089/2015-16 (Manual Appeal Register Number : 0598/2014-15) For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld.Ar That The Original Assessment Was Came To Be Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 17.02.2015. It Was The Submission That Subsequently The Order U/S.263 Of The Act Has Been Passed On 23.03.2017, Wherein In The Last Paragraph The Ld. Pr.Cit Has Held As Follows :- “In View Of The Above, The Assessment Order In Question Is Hereby Set Aside To The Ao For Adjudication Of The Issues Afresh To That Extent & Reframe The Assessment After Proper Appreciation Of Facts & Application Of Law & As Per The Observation & Direction Given Above. Needless To Say While Reframing The Assessment Order, The Ao Should Provide Adequate Opportunity To The Assessee.”

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263