BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI 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.

131 results for “reassessment”+ Section 125clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi582Mumbai509Bangalore188Ahmedabad131Chennai130Jaipur110Chandigarh79Kolkata61Hyderabad55Indore52Raipur47Telangana37Surat30Guwahati29Agra27Pune26Amritsar25Lucknow25Rajkot20Allahabad20Nagpur20Visakhapatnam16Jodhpur14Cochin14Cuttack14Ranchi13SC9Dehradun8Patna7Calcutta4Orissa4Karnataka3Rajasthan2Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 14745Section 14A36Section 14836Addition to Income36Section 13229Section 26322Section 1122Reassessment21Section 2(15)20Section 143(3)

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1345/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148Section 43BSection 80I

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7

17
Disallowance17
Penalty13

SHREE RAMA MULTI-TECH LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 722/AHD/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148Section 43BSection 80I

reassessment are satisfied, is only relatable to the preceding expression in clauses (a) and (b) viz., 'escaped assessment'. The term 'escaped assessment' includes both 'non- assessment' as well as 'under assessment'. Income is said to have 'escaped assessment' within the meaning of this section when it has not been charged in the hands of an assessee in the relevant year

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

ITA 46/AHD/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1901/AHD/2019[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

ITA 45/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

ITA 49/AHD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

ITA 34/AHD/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. SMT. MANJULABEN BIPINCHANDRA PATEL, BARODA

ITA 42/AHD/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1900/AHD/2019[2006-07]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1902/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1912/AHD/2019[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1908/AHD/2019[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

ITA 33/AHD/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1898/AHD/2019[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1915/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

SMT. MANJULABEN B. PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1907/AHD/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEHAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

ITA 31/AHD/2020[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA vs. MANJULABEN B. PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF SHRI BIPINBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL, BARODA

ITA 40/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1899/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court

MANJULABEN BIPINBHAI PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE BIPINBHAI P.PATEL,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

ITA 1903/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 132

125 Taxmann.com 348 (Gujarat) and submitted that the validity of the reopening of the assessment has to be determined with reference to the reasons as recorded by the AO. He asserted that sufficiency or correctness of any material cannot be considered at the stage of the notice. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court