Search: reassessment u/s 147 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases 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.

36 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 37clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,308 Mumbai1,269 Bangalore442 Chennai438 Jaipur365 Ahmedabad300 Hyderabad241 Kolkata209 Chandigarh159 Pune140 Raipur114 Indore102 Surat87 Amritsar81 Rajkot59 Cuttack59 Guwahati57 Visakhapatnam52 Cochin52 Lucknow50 Patna46 Allahabad36 Nagpur36 Jodhpur30 Telangana30 Agra28 Dehradun28 Karnataka16 Orissa4 Panaji4 SC3 Kerala3 Ranchi3 Varanasi2 Gauhati2 Rajasthan1 Jabalpur1 Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 14836 Section 14731 Section 153A24 Section 143(2)17 Charitable Trust16 Section 143(3)15 Addition to Income10 Section 153D8 Section 139(1)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, MIRZAPUR vs. M/S. J.P.YADAV , SONEBHADRA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 319/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad11 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Shukla,C.AFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 194C

37,000/-“ 5. Aggrieved by reassessment order dated 22.11.2017 passed by AO u/s 147 read with Section 144 of the 1961 Act, the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

7

Section 143(1)5

Limitation/Time-bar5

SANJAY MAJUMDAR,ALLAHABAD vs. PR. CIT, ALLAHABAD

ITA 68/ALLD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad28 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Sanjay Majumdar, V. The Principal Commissioner Type Ii – 112, Devprayagam Of Income Tax, Sangam Vatika – Jhalwa, Aayakar Bhawan, Allahabad 211012 38, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211001 Pan: Adopm 2688P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Basudev Banerjee, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Chanda, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 154Section 263

reassessment order dated 24.06.2016 passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) 4 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sanjay Majumdar r.w.s. 147 of the 1961 Act is erroneous so far as is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue within provisions of Section 263 of the 1961 Act, by holding as under: “3. I have considered the assessment proceeding of the Assessing

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7/ALLD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 8/ALLD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 5/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 53/ALLD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 52/ALLD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 51/ALLD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 9/ALLD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 50/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

SANJANA,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 54/ALLD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

YOGI SATYAM,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), ALLAHABAD

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6/ALLD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

147 of the Act against the appellant by observing "Since the appeal is decided on merits, hence these grounds are not adjudicated." 2. BECAUSE the CIT(A) has completely erred in giving partial relief of Rs.37.500/- only (i.e. restricting addition of 50% which has been calculated @ 7.5% of Rs.5,00,000/-), even after having accepting the fact that the amount

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

ITA 113/ALLD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 153A have been framed by ACIT, Central Circle, New Delhi, therefore, prior approval of the JCIT in respect of each assessment year referred to under section 153A or 153B shall have to be obtained. Thus, no order of assessment or re-assessment shall be passed by the A.O. in the present cases in respect of each assessment years under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD vs. JYOTI MEDISERVICES LTD., ALLAHABAD

ITA 129/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 153A have been framed by ACIT, Central Circle, New Delhi, therefore, prior approval of the JCIT in respect of each assessment year referred to under section 153A or 153B shall have to be obtained. Thus, no order of assessment or re-assessment shall be passed by the A.O. in the present cases in respect of each assessment years under

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, ,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , ALLAHABAD

ITA 115/ALLD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 153A have been framed by ACIT, Central Circle, New Delhi, therefore, prior approval of the JCIT in respect of each assessment year referred to under section 153A or 153B shall have to be obtained. Thus, no order of assessment or re-assessment shall be passed by the A.O. in the present cases in respect of each assessment years under

JYOTI MEDISERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

ITA 114/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

section 153A have been framed by ACIT, Central Circle, New Delhi, therefore, prior approval of the JCIT in respect of each assessment year referred to under section 153A or 153B shall have to be obtained. Thus, no order of assessment or re-assessment shall be passed by the A.O. in the present cases in respect of each assessment years under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALLAHABAD vs. NAVJEEVAN PEDIATRICS PRIVATE LIMITED, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 44/ALLD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

147 taxmann.com 305 (Allahabad)/ 450 ITR 534 (Allahabad); have been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in decisions at ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC) and vide order dated 09/08/2024 in SLP(C) Diary No.43280/2023 in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Siddharth Gupta, respectively. (J.1.2) Similarly, in the case of Pr.CIT & Anr. Vs. Sapna Gupta (supra

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), ALLAHABAD vs. JEEVAN JYOTI CHARITABLE TRUST, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 41/ALLD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

147 taxmann.com 305 (Allahabad)/ 450 ITR 534 (Allahabad); have been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in decisions at ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC) and vide order dated 09/08/2024 in SLP(C) Diary No.43280/2023 in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Siddharth Gupta, respectively. (J.1.2) Similarly, in the case of Pr.CIT & Anr. Vs. Sapna Gupta (supra

VANDANA BANSAL L/H OF LATE DR. ASHWANI KUMAR BANSAL, ,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 35/ALLD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

147 taxmann.com 305 (Allahabad)/ 450 ITR 534 (Allahabad); have been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in decisions at ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC) and vide order dated 09/08/2024 in SLP(C) Diary No.43280/2023 in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Siddharth Gupta, respectively. (J.1.2) Similarly, in the case of Pr.CIT & Anr. Vs. Sapna Gupta (supra

VANDANA BANSAL L/H OF LATE DR. ASHWANI KUMAR BANSAL, ,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeals and Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 36/ALLD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

147 taxmann.com 305 (Allahabad)/ 450 ITR 534 (Allahabad); have been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in decisions at ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC) and vide order dated 09/08/2024 in SLP(C) Diary No.43280/2023 in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Siddharth Gupta, respectively. (J.1.2) Similarly, in the case of Pr.CIT & Anr. Vs. Sapna Gupta (supra