BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

51 results for “reassessment”+ Disallowanceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,702Delhi1,058Chennai569Jaipur318Bangalore308Kolkata283Ahmedabad277Hyderabad235Chandigarh175Pune154Raipur130Indore114Surat103Amritsar96Rajkot69Nagpur63Cochin61Guwahati57Visakhapatnam54Agra51Jodhpur45Lucknow42Patna42Cuttack41Allahabad35Ranchi31Dehradun12Panaji11Jabalpur2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)74Addition to Income48Section 14747Section 14839Reassessment26Disallowance26Section 37(1)25Section 6822Section 153A22Section 270A

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 391/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147\nread with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house\nproperty of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

SHYAMA SHYAM INFRADEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ITO 2(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 51 · Page 1 of 3

22
Bogus Purchases19
Natural Justice19
ITA 503/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed
ITAT Agra
23 Jan 2026
AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshshyama Shyam Vs. Ito, Infradevelopers Pvt Ltd, Ward-2(1)(2), Khasra No. 961, Bhahistabad, Agra Sikandra, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aatcs9899R Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

disallowance and completed the reassessment. Hence, it is very clear that no addition has been made by the ld Assessing

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 390/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147\nread with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house\nproperty of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

MR. TASAVVER HUSAIN,FARRUKHABAD vs. ACIT, FARRUKHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 270A

reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order. (11) No addition or disallowance of an amount shall form the basis for imposition

MR. TASAVVER HUSAIN,FARRUKHABAD vs. ACIT , FARRUKHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 96/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 270A

reassessed or recomputed in a preceding order. (11) No addition or disallowance of an amount shall form the basis for imposition

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), ALIGARH, ALIGARH vs. MOHD. INTZAR, ALIGARH

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 318/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.318/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit Circle 4(1)(1) Mohd. Intzar बनाम/ Aligarh 202001 140, Sarai Mitan Vs. Delhi Gate, Aligarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagpi-7161-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Deepak Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Singh (Advocate) – Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

disallowed and added as unexplained income u/s 69C. 3. The assessee challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings by placing reliance

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 389/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: \nShri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147\nread with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house\nproperty of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

SH. YUGAL KISHOR AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(3)(1), ETAH

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3/AGR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 57

reassessment order u/s 147 read with Section 143(3) dated 24.10.2019, the Assessing Officer made two additions – firstly, disallowance of Rs.12

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 369/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147\nread with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house\nproperty of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 368/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 367/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 388/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

reassessment was completed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed

HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 251/AGR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

reassessment proceedings were initiated for verification of bogus purchases from Mr Irfan, after verification of the above issues, AO recorded statement u/s 131 of the Act and after considering the submissions of assessee, he accepted that the transactions are genuine and accordingly did not propose any addition or disallowances

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 301/AGR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

reassessment proceedings were initiated for verification of bogus purchases from Mr Irfan, after verification of the above issues, AO recorded statement u/s 131 of the Act and after considering the submissions of assessee, he accepted that the transactions are genuine and accordingly did not propose any addition or disallowances

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, AGRA

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 303/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

reassessment proceedings were initiated for verification of bogus purchases from Mr Irfan, after verification of the above issues, AO recorded statement u/s 131 of the Act and after considering the submissions of assessee, he accepted that the transactions are genuine and accordingly did not propose any addition or disallowances

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AGRA, SANJAY PLACE vs. MAMTA AGARWAL, BHAGWATI INTERNATIONAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 148Section 148A

reassessment proceedings before the Id AO. In other words, the assessee vehemently pleaded that the purchase made by her from Shri Trading Company was genuine and out of such purchase, the assessee had made corresponding sales which were already disclosed in her books of account and in the return of income. The Id AO completely disregarded the entire contentions

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

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

ITA 344/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

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

ITA 343/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra29 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

disallowance of depreciation claimed on fixed assets. In first appeal preferred against the above said assessment order dated 31.03.2016, learned CIT(A) vide order dated 25.06.2025 affirmed the rejection of accounts and sustained the addition made by AO on account of low profit rate. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.342/Agr/2025 before the ITAT, which has been partly allowed

M/S AGRA PRODUCTS PVT.LTD.,GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR vs. DEPUTY C.I.T CIRCLE -2(1)(1), AGRA

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 121/AGR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.121/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Agra Products Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-Circle-2(1)(1), बनाम/ Plot No. 99, Phase-Ii, Nsez, Noida, Agra Vs. Gautum Bhuddha Nagar, U.P. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aadca-3621-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Pankaj Gargh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Gargh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

disallowance of expense for Rs.1 Lacs. However, the assessment was reopened, apparently, at the behest of audit objection and notice u/s 148 was issued on 30-03-2017. The case was reopened to re-compute the MAT liability of the assessee and to deny adjustment of brought forward business losses on the ground that the accumulated profits were in credit

ACIT, CC, AGRA, AGRA vs. HMA AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED, AGRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2019-20 is\nallowed and appeals filed by the Revenue in AYs 2021-22, 2022-23 and\n2023-24 are dismissed

ITA 300/AGR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

reassessment proceedings. Based on the above observations, he\ncame to the conclusion that there is non-application of mind on the part of\nassessing officer in as much as the necessary verification of facts/enquiries\nwhich should have been made, have not been made, making the assessment\norder erroneous, prejudicial to the interest of revenue in terms of clause