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.

94 results for “reassessment”+ Section 201clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi589Mumbai354Bangalore292Chennai204Jaipur117Ahmedabad94Kolkata55Chandigarh44Visakhapatnam36Pune35Cuttack31Rajkot29Hyderabad28Raipur28Cochin24Amritsar19Jodhpur17Surat12Patna12Indore12Lucknow11Dehradun8Karnataka7Guwahati5Nagpur5Panaji4Allahabad3SC3Telangana3Agra2Uttarakhand1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 13244Addition to Income36Section 14733Section 80I24Section 143(3)23Section 1122Section 26321Section 2(15)20Section 14817Exemption

M/S MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE -4(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3142/AHD/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3142/Ahd/2011 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2004-2005 M/S. Welspun Projects Limited, Income Tax Officer, (Formerly Known As Msk Project Vs. Ward-4(1), (India) Ltd.,) Vadodara. 707-708, Sterling Centre, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 80I

201 CTR (SC) 63: (2006) 260 ITR 321 (SC) : (2006) 150 Taxman 128 and similarly in the case of Danish Industries Ltd. Vs. income Tax Officer Ref No. (2004) 190 CTR (GuJ) 485: (2004) 271 ITR 340 (Guj): (2004) 140 Taxman 456 reassessment under section

Showing 1–20 of 94 · Page 1 of 5

17
Deduction13
Reassessment12

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature

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

ITA 50/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

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

Section 132

reassessment should be judged by the law as existing on the date of issue of notice and that if the notice and the assessment year is within the time period in compliance to the retrospective law, such notice can’t be questioned. The principle that the liability to the State is independent of any consideration of time and the legislature