Search: reassessment | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

858 results for “reassessment”

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,623 Mumbai3,359 Chennai1,202 Ahmedabad858 Kolkata779 Jaipur656 Bangalore601 Hyderabad601 Pune471 Raipur457 Chandigarh405 Indore294 Rajkot260 Surat237 Amritsar212 Cochin198 Patna177 Visakhapatnam171 Cuttack150 Agra147 Nagpur146 Guwahati109 Ranchi107 Lucknow91 Dehradun89 Jodhpur83 Allahabad48 Panaji34 Jabalpur16 Varanasi9

Key Topics

Section 147113 Addition to Income86 Section 143(3)84 Section 14880 Section 26374 Section 14A56 Reassessment49 Disallowance40 Section 6835 Section 153A

GHANSHYAMBHAI AMBALAL PATEL,KHEDA vs. THE PCIT-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1007/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Divyakant Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 263Section 69A

reassessment per se. Logically the Ld. AO should have simply dropped the initiation of reassessment proceedings instead of passing reassessment

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 858 · Page 1 of 43

...

33

Reopening of Assessment19

ITA 339/AHD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 43(5)

reassessment notice on two grounds. The main ground for reassessment notice was with reference to transactions with NSEL for Rs.244.98

THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI VIGHNAHARTA REALITY PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2370/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) / Cos By :

For Appellant: Sl.Nos.1-6. Shri Dhiren Shah, AR &For Respondent: Sl.Nos. 1,3&5 Shri V.Nandakumar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment provisions. The reassessment framework operates independently, provided the conditions prescribed under the law are satisfied. The essential requirement for invoking

ITO, WARD-4(1)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHIVGANGA PROPERTY HOLDERS PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2112/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) / Cos By :

For Appellant: Sl.Nos.1-6. Shri Dhiren Shah, AR &For Respondent: Sl.Nos. 1,3&5 Shri V.Nandakumar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment provisions. The reassessment framework operates independently, provided the conditions prescribed under the law are satisfied. The essential requirement for invoking

SHIVGANGA PROPERTY HOLDERS PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-4(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2206/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) / Cos By :

For Appellant: Sl.Nos.1-6. Shri Dhiren Shah, AR &For Respondent: Sl.Nos. 1,3&5 Shri V.Nandakumar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment provisions. The reassessment framework operates independently, provided the conditions prescribed under the law are satisfied. The essential requirement for invoking

SHRI VIGHNAHARTA REALTY PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2205/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: \nSl.Nos.1-6. Shri Dhiren Shah, AR &For Respondent: \nSl.Nos.1,3&5 Shri V.Nandakumar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment provisions. The reassessment framework\noperates independently, provided the conditions prescribed under the law\nare satisfied. The essential requirement for invoking

OVEZ ARIFBHAI LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

For Appellant: Shri Bharat R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-D.R

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

reassessment order passed by the AO , and rightly directed the AO to pass a fresh reassessment order after examining the facts

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1293/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment. 7.22 In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that: i. The reassessment proceedings under section 147 were validly

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1294/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment. 7.22 In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that: i. The reassessment proceedings under section 147 were validly

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1292/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment. 7.22 In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that: i. The reassessment proceedings under section 147 were validly

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1296/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment. 7.22 In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that: i. The reassessment proceedings under section 147 were validly

YAKIN JAYANTILAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1295/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment. 7.22 In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that: i. The reassessment proceedings under section 147 were validly

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 427/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 as valid when reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search conducted in case of third

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 424/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 as valid when reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search conducted in case of third

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 425/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 as valid when reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search conducted in case of third

BINITABEN SANDIPKUMAR PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE PR.CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Sejalben Patel The Pr.Cit-1 1049, Kantvalue Faliyu Vs. Vadodara. At & Po-Karkhadi Tal. Padra, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Drhpp 9550 D Asstt.Year : 2018-19 Binitaben Sandipkumar Patel The Pr.Cit-1 Javla, Chotra Pase Vs. Vadodara. Savli, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Cwopp 4609 Q (Applicant) (Responent)

For Appellant: Ms.Urvashi Sodhan, AR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 194Section 263Section 31Section 54

reassessment order as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. It was pointed out that during the course of reassessment

SEJALBEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE PR.CIT, VADODARA-1, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 701/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19 Sejalben Patel The Pr.Cit-1 1049, Kantvalue Faliyu Vs. Vadodara. At & Po-Karkhadi Tal. Padra, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Drhpp 9550 D Asstt.Year : 2018-19 Binitaben Sandipkumar Patel The Pr.Cit-1 Javla, Chotra Pase Vs. Vadodara. Savli, Dist. Vadodara. Pan : Cwopp 4609 Q (Applicant) (Responent)

For Appellant: Ms.Urvashi Sodhan, AR

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 194Section 263Section 31Section 54

reassessment order as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. It was pointed out that during the course of reassessment

KUSHAL VINODKUMAR BHATT LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR RAMANLAL BHATT,ANAND vs. THE ACIT (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 752/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159(2)(b)

reassessment by impleading the legal heir in the reassessment order is not permissible in law and relied upon following case

ARCOY INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby\nallowed

ITA 426/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: \nShri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 as valid\nwhen reassessment proceedings cannot be conducted on the basis of search\nconducted in case of third

MANISH RANJAN, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AAYKAR BHAWAN ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD vs. RASHMIN KANTILAL VAKTA, ELLISBRIDGE AHMEDABAD GUJARAT

ITA 865/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

reassessment orders, written submissions of the assessee, and judicial precedents, rejected the assessee’s challenge to the validity of reassessment