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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,333 Mumbai1,318 Bangalore485 Chennai471 Ahmedabad250 Jaipur250 Kolkata236 Hyderabad230 Chandigarh149 Raipur106 Indore77 Pune77 Surat69 Rajkot68 Amritsar63 Cuttack47 Guwahati45 Nagpur43 Patna41 Lucknow40 Visakhapatnam33 Allahabad32 Telangana30 Jodhpur30 Cochin28 Dehradun22 Karnataka16 Agra15 Orissa4 Panaji4 Kerala3 SC3 Gauhati2 Ranchi2 Varanasi2 Rajasthan1 Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 153A24 Section 14723 Section 14820 Charitable Trust16 Section 143(3)12 Section 143(2)9 Section 153D8 Addition to Income6 Disallowance

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 32 · Page 1 of 2

5

Section 271(1)(c)4

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 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 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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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 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

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 34/ALLD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

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

JEEVAN JYOTI INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD , ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 56/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

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

ARPIT HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, 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 13/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

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

ARPIT HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, 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 14/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 39/ALLD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

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