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.

5 results for “reassessment”+ Section 36(1)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi521Mumbai421Bangalore139Jaipur115Chandigarh104Chennai98Indore52Kolkata44Ahmedabad43Guwahati42Cochin32Raipur28Hyderabad26Nagpur22Pune20Allahabad20Lucknow18Patna17Rajkot15Surat15Agra13Jodhpur12Cuttack9SC8Telangana8Karnataka5Amritsar5Orissa4Ranchi3Visakhapatnam2Dehradun2Varanasi2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 1478Section 143(3)5Section 153D4Addition to Income4Section 1483Section 50C3Section 682Section 692Section 912Unexplained Money

SHRI MADAL LAL,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 112/ASR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 153B(1)Section 153D

viii. Shri Saurabh Agarwal C/o D.S. (India) Jewelmart P. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 263-267/Agr/2017 ix PCIT vs. Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd. 89 taxmann.com 1 (Guj.) x. Inter International, ITA No. 1573/Chd/2018 (ITAT-Chd.) xi. UttrakhandUthanSamitee vs. ITO, ITA No. 48- 52/DDN/2019 (ITAT-Del). xii. Sanjay Duggal &ors vs. ACIT, ITA No.1797- 1827/Del/2019 & ITA No. 1608-1627/Del/2019

SHRI JASBIR SINGH ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-I (2), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar
2
Cash Deposit2
15 Jan 2020
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.426/Asr/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

viii).DCIT Vs. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development ITA No.4964/Mum/2014 (referred to page 10- 13 para 12) 7. We note that the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 660/Kol/2011 for 4 | P a g e Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Jasbir Singh. AY 2002-03 in the case of DCIT Vs. Great Wall Marketing

SMT. GURJEET KAUR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- IV (2),, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our

ITA 627/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69Section 91

viii). that no adverse inferences had been drawn by the department in the case of the alleged purchaser, viz. Sh. Surjit Singh, and in fact the reassessment proceedings that were initiated in his case for A.Y 2008-09 had been dropped by his A.O vide her order passed u/s 147/148(3), dated 23.03.2016; (ix). that the 10 Smt. Gurjeet Kaur

SMT. GURJEET KAUR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- IV (2),, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our

ITA 628/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69Section 91

viii). that no adverse inferences had been drawn by the department in the case of the alleged purchaser, viz. Sh. Surjit Singh, and in fact the reassessment proceedings that were initiated in his case for A.Y 2008-09 had been dropped by his A.O vide her order passed u/s 147/148(3), dated 23.03.2016; (ix). that the 10 Smt. Gurjeet Kaur

NEERAJ KUMAR SETHI,DELHI vs. ITO, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 9/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, C.A
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

36 has been subsequently revised and the revised grounds are as follows: “1. That the assessment order framed by the AO is void ab-initio having been framed without giving reasonable opportunity to the appellant to respond to the statutory Show Cause Notice required to be issued to the assessee before framing the, assessment requiring the assessee to submit