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.

28 results for “reassessment”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi397Mumbai388Bangalore109Chennai103Karnataka94Kolkata58Jaipur48Hyderabad47Ahmedabad28Telangana25Lucknow22Chandigarh21Panaji11SC10Cochin9Surat9Pune9Nagpur9Rajkot6Jodhpur6Cuttack4Raipur4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Patna3Rajasthan2Orissa2Ranchi2Agra2Indore1Punjab & Haryana1Guwahati1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 14734Section 26322Section 143(3)21Addition to Income20Section 6817Section 14813Section 153A12Reassessment12Section 271(1)(c)10

MINOR HARESH KARSANBHAI PATEL ORAL SPECIFIC DEFERRED FAMILY TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(2) NOW WARD- 5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 863/AHD/2023[1982-83]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 1982-83

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 863/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 1982-1983 Minor Haresh Karsanbhai Patel Oral Income Tax Officer, Specific Deferred Family Trust, Vs. Ward-5(2)(2), Nirma House, Ahmedabad. Near Income Tax Circle, Now Ashram Road, Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad-380009. Ward 5(3)(1), Ahmedabad Pan: Aaath4880P

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 244A

260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

M/S GREENWELL ORCHARDS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-3 , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

Reopening of Assessment10
Penalty8
Survey u/s 133A6
ITA 695/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.R. and Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT/DR
Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

260 (SC). Section 2(14), read with sections 28(i) and 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Capital asset (Surrender of plot) - Assessment year 2008- 09 - Assessee entered into a joint venture agreement for acquisition of a plot from Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) - Allotment of plot was made by MIDC in February, 2006 - Assessee relinquished

SHAH JITENDRAKUMAR MAFATLAL HUF,ELLISBRIDGE, AHMEDABAD vs. PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 645/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 263

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act, and again the Principal CIT has initiated proceedings under section 263 of the Act, to enquire into the same issue by observing that there was lack of enquiry on the part of the assessing officer. In our considered view, the Department has at various stages of proceedings (both during the course

GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRECLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 318/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Shah, A.R. & Shri Jimi Patel , A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.’ 2. New Rule 8D : 2.1 In exercise of the powers given in S. 14A(2) C.B.D.T. has issued

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1636/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69A

section 147 for all assessment years. He recorded that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings solely on the basis of seized unaccounted cash book and supporting vouchers found during the search in the Venus Group at the premises known as Terrace of Crystal Arcade/Crystal Plaza, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad. The CIT(A) held that the AO had duly recorded reasons

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1635/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Revenue by Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69A

section 147 for all assessment years. He recorded that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings solely on the basis of seized unaccounted cash book and supporting vouchers found during the search in the Venus Group at the premises known as Terrace of Crystal Arcade/Crystal Plaza, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad. The CIT(A) held that the AO had duly recorded reasons

DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FALGUNI SURYAKANT THAKAR , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in quantum appeal in IT(SS)A No

ITA 1563/AHD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

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

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 69

260/- levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by holding that the assessment order passed under section 153C r.w.s. 144 for A.Y. 2009-10 is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, without appreciating that the said assessment was validly made within the extended limitation period and in accordance with the provisions

SHRI BHUMIKA STRIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1363/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2026AY 2015-16
Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 68

section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021. In response thereto, the Assessee filed its Return of Income admitting total income of Rs.22,01,770/- on 30.04.2021. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessee purchased S.S. Cold, Rolled Patta/Patti and also produced tax invoices, which was not accepted by the AO and added as follows: Sr.No. Name of the party

SHRI BHUMIKA STRIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1362/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 68

section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021. In response thereto, the Assessee filed its Return of Income admitting total income of Rs.22,01,770/- on 30.04.2021. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessee purchased S.S. Cold, Rolled Patta/Patti and also produced tax invoices, which was not accepted by the AO and added as follows: Sr.No. Name of the party

SHRI BHUMIKA STRIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1364/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2026AY 2016-17
Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 68

section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021. In response thereto, the Assessee filed its Return of Income admitting total income of Rs.22,01,770/- on 30.04.2021. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessee purchased S.S. Cold, Rolled Patta/Patti and also produced tax invoices, which was not accepted by the AO and added as follows: Sr.No. Name of the party

SHRI RAOOF R DHANANI,,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on jurisdiction

ITA 3367/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B

260 ITR (St.) 219-221, also mentions that provisions of sections 153A, 153B and 153C were inserted to provide for assessment in the case of search or making requisition. [Para 16] I.T.A No. 3367/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 7 Shri Raoof R. Dhanani vs. ACIT The settled position of law is that if there is no ambiguity then, literal

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

ITA 1673/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

260, to contend that third-party chats cannot determine the value of a different property. On merits, he emphasized the complete lack of corroboration, the time lag, the difference in property details, and the absence of any cash trail, relying on the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese

THE ITO, WARD-13(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SHIVAJIRAO R.CHAVAN,, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 332/AHD/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 1996-1997

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

section 147/148. From the so-called reasons, it was not at all discernible as to whether the Assessing Officer had applied his mind to the information and independently arrived at a belief that, on the basis of the material which he had before him, income had escaped assessment. Therefore, the reassessment was not valid. Principal Commissioner of Income

SHRI SHIVAJIRAO R.CHAVAN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(2),, AHMEDABAD

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 1996-1997

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

section 147/148. From the so-called reasons, it was not at all discernible as to whether the Assessing Officer had applied his mind to the information and independently arrived at a belief that, on the basis of the material which he had before him, income had escaped assessment. Therefore, the reassessment was not valid. Principal Commissioner of Income

SHALIGRAM INFRA PROJECTS LLP ( LTD. LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP),AHMEDABAD vs. THE JCIT (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 233/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarit(Ss)A No.167/Ahd/2021 Asstt.Year : 2017-18 & Asst.Year : 2018-19 Shaligram Infra Projects Llp Vs. The Jcit (Osd) 4Th Floor, Office No.401-402 Central Cir.2(2) B/H. Dishman House Ahmedabad. Opp: Sankalp Grace Ii, Ambli Ahmedabad. Pan: Acpfs 7047 A It(Ss)A No.194,195 & 196/Ahd/2021 Asstt.Year : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 & Asst.Year : 2018-19 The Jcit (Osd) Vs. Shaligram Infra Projects Llp Central Cir.2(2) 4Th Floor, Office No.401-402 Ahmedabad. B/H. Dishman House Opp: Sankalp Grace Ii, Ambli Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

260 sq yard, Plot No 27= 228 sq mtr= 273 sq yard]. In the page no 58, total area of land and bungalows sold by Shri Ashwin B Dudhat and his brothers and the on-money component of sale consideration has been shown 893 sq yards and Rs.66,521/-per sq yard. 3.4 After analysing seized materials, Revenue appointed Special

THE DCIT-CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHREE SIDDHI INFRABUILD PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

Accordingly kept open.\n10. All Revenue appeals fail on merits and are dismissed

ITA 1637/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Dec 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69A

section 147 for all assessment years.\nHe recorded that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment\nproceedings solely on the basis of seized unaccounted cash book and\nsupporting vouchers found during the search in the Venus Group at the\npremises known as Terrace of Crystal Arcade/Crystal Plaza, C.G. Road,\nAhmedabad. The CIT(A) held that the AO had duly recorded reasons

JAYESHBHAI GORDHANBHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the interest of justice

ITA 71/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.71/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Jayeshbhai Gordhanbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ Kishan Cowk Ward-1(3)(1) V/S. Piplav, Anand – 388 460 Petlad – 388 450 Gujarat "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bixpp 2069 Q (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Darshan Belani, Ar Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 29/09/2022 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-2012. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Hon’Ble Cit(A) Erred In Law & Facts Of The Case By Upholding The Addition Amounting To Rs.23.30,500/- Made As Unexplained Investments In Case Of The Appellant For Ay 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Reserves The Right To Add/Alter Or Amend Any Of The Ground Of Appeal.” Jayeshbhai Gordhanbhai Patel Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Belani, ARFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 250Section 253(5)

section 148 of the Act. In response, the assessee filed his return Jayeshbhai Gordhanbhai Patel vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 declaring total income of Rs. 1,13,260/- and agricultural income of Rs. 85,000/-. During the reassessment

AADI REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 928/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Aadi Real Estate Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward 1(1)(1), 402, Sheel Complex, Mayur Ahmedabad Colony, Mithakhali, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Aajca 1796 R अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 25.05.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Relating To The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company & Had Filed ‘Nil’ Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year, I.E. Ay 2012-13. Subsequently, On Information Received From Ddit (Inv.), Unit-1 (3), Ahmedabad, By The Assessing Officer That The Assessee Was A Beneficiary Of Accommodation Entry Taken Through Dummy Companies Run & Controlled By One Jignesh Shah, Which Information Was Revealed Consequent To Search Action Conducted On Jignesh Shah, The Case Of The Aadi Real Estate Developers Pvt Ltd Vs. Ito Ay : 2012-13 2

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 250Section 68

reassessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to prove the genuineness of the transactions entered into by it with the alleged dummy companies of Shri Jignesh Shah amounting to Rs.4,73,20,000/- and was also asked to explain the source of investment in the property purchased amounting to Rs.6.75 crores during the year. The proceedings were largely unrepresented

DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEBABAD vs. TECHNO INDUSTRIES, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 659/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Deputy Commissioner Of Techno Industries, Vs. Income Tax, Plot No.613, Phase Iv Gidc, Circle 3(1)(1), Vatva, Ahmedabad-382245. Ahmedabad. [Pan :Aacft1503 D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Abhijit, Sr. Dr Respondent By: Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Date Of Hearing 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

section 143(1), and subsequently assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 25.12.2016, assessing income at Rs.50,30,260/-. Subsequently, based on information received from the Investigation Wing , the Assessing Officer formed a belief that the assessee had availed bogus accommodation entries in the form of loans and advances and claimed DCIT Vs. Techno Industries Asst. Year

SNEHA PAWAN AGARWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1369/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 253(5)

section 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act after issuance of show cause notice.\nDuring the course of the proceedings, the assessee furnished only limited\ndetails at the fag end of the assessment process.\n3.3 The summarised details of the assessment orders are tabulated\nbelow:\nITA No.1368 and 1369/Ahd/2025 4\nParticulars\nΑ.Υ. 2014-15\nΑ.Υ. 2016-17\nOriginal\nreturn