BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

7 results for “reassessment”+ Section 91clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai513Delhi347Chennai209Ahmedabad179Bangalore158Jaipur136Hyderabad125Raipur82Chandigarh58Rajkot53Kolkata52Indore46Pune41Guwahati32Surat32Patna30Agra27Cochin27Jodhpur20Nagpur16Lucknow14Visakhapatnam10Allahabad7Cuttack7Amritsar7Ranchi5Dehradun3Panaji3Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14712Section 14812Section 2509Addition to Income6Section 250(6)3Cash Deposit3Section 133A2Section 2822Section 143(3)2Section 40A(3)

SH. JOGINDER SINGH S/O. SH. GURDIAL SINGH,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 198/ASR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150Section 153(3)

reassessment proceedings being unaccounted investment in purchase of land. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has although granted relief to the appellant in the terms indicated here under: 5.1 I have given careful consideration to the contention of the appellant and find that there existed enough material to come to a conclusion that extra money/premium has been paid in the purchase

2
Double Taxation/DTAA2
Survey u/s 133A2

SHRI GURBINDER SINGH MAHAL,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-IV ( 2), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 22/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 144oSection 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 250o

91-94 stamp duty document no.556315 12. Copy of sale deed in the name of Harjit Singh dated 29/04/2013 95-98 stamp duty document no.A092727 13. Copy of sale deed in the name of Harjit Singh dated 14/05/2013 99-102 stamp duty document no.A143188 14. Copy of sale deed in the name of Harjit Singh dated 14/05/2013 103-106 stamp

PANKAJ JINDAL CONTRACTOR,MANSA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, BATHINDA, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 695/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 695/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Pankaj Jindal Contractor, Vs. Dcit-Circle-1, Near Vidya Bharti School, Bathinda. Mansa. [Pan:-Aajfp8008L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148aSection 250Section 282Section 40A(3)Section 68

reassessment on the basis of audit objection is legally invalid in absence of any tangible material gathered post assessment , and all materials regarding expenses incurred were made available to the AO in original proceedings and are all existing in assessment records , on which due application of mind has been made by the AO , and the revenue audit

MANDEEP SINGH S/O SH. NARINDER SINGH VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE TARMALA MALOUT DISTRICT MUKTSAR,MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5) MUKTSAR JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2) MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 645/ASR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jun 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 282Section 69A

reassessment proceedings.” ii) Sh. Mohd Yousuf Wani vs. ITO in ITA No. 372/Asr/2009(Amritsar ITAT): I.T.A. No. 645/Asr/2024 10 Assessment Year: 2012-13 “ In our considered view, reliance placed by the A.O on the letter of Vigilance Department was not sufficient to make a belief that the income of the Assessee has escaped assessment. In the present case, the reason

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI CHUNI LAL, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT DR
Section 133A

91 ITR 18 (SC) the Supreme Court held that an admission is a piece of evidence though it is not conclusive. Consequently, a statement made voluntary under Section 133A of the Act cannot be retracted unless the assessee files evidence to show Chuni Lal Gaba v. Asstt. CIT& Ors that the admission made in the statement at the time

ASSIATANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PHAGWARA CIRCLE, PHAGWARA vs. SHRI HARMESH KUMAR, PHILLAUR

In the result, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT DR
Section 133A

91 ITR 18 (SC) the Supreme Court held that an admission is a piece of evidence though it is not conclusive. Consequently, a statement made voluntary under Section 133A of the Act cannot be retracted unless the assessee files evidence to show Chuni Lal Gaba v. Asstt. CIT& Ors that the admission made in the statement at the time

SHRI GULZAR AHMAD DAR ,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 530/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 44A

91,20,964/- in his saving bank account no. xxxx000011 maintained with Jammu & Kashmir Bank but did not file his return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17. Accordingly, the case was re-opened and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2023. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed