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.

760 results for “reassessment”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,532Mumbai2,060Bangalore760Chennai684Ahmedabad563Jaipur536Kolkata505Raipur376Pune335Hyderabad292Chandigarh223Surat198Indore182Rajkot166Amritsar139Cuttack131Visakhapatnam115Karnataka111Nagpur92Patna91Agra85Guwahati77Lucknow76Telangana68Ranchi66Cochin65Dehradun54Allahabad53Jodhpur44Calcutta23SC17Orissa12Panaji11Varanasi10Jabalpur10Rajasthan7Kerala6Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 148109Addition to Income78Section 153A64Section 143(3)61Section 14751Section 153C46Section 133A41Section 27440Reassessment30Section 271(1)(c)

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 464/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

reassessment and the assessee was asked to explain it but the statement was itself not furnished to the assessee. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons for re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice

MOHAMMED IBRABIM MOHIDEEN ,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

Showing 1–20 of 760 · Page 1 of 38

...
29
Natural Justice27
Penalty26
ITA 486/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

reassessment and the assessee was asked to explain it but the statement was itself not furnished to the assessee. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons for re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 463/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

reassessment and the assessee was asked to explain it but the statement was itself not furnished to the assessee. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons for re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 466/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

reassessment and the assessee was asked to explain it but the statement was itself not furnished to the assessee. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons for re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 779/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 234DSection 68

justice be rendered.” 3.2 In written submissions, the assessee has submitted as under :- “ The assessee is a Public Limited Company. For the above assessment year, the assessee filed its return of income on 19.09.2005 declaring total income of Rs. 5,66,06,899/- (PB page 1). The search and seizure operation purportedly u/s 132 of the Income

MOHAMMED IBRAHIM MOHIDEEN,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA\nNo

ITA 465/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2016-17
Section 153ASection 69B

reassessment and the assessee was asked to explain it but the statement was\nitself not furnished to the assessee. As such, besides non-furnishing of the reasons\nfor re-opening there was also a gross violation of the principles of natural justice

NIYAZ SEA FOODS ,MANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1019/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 2Section 41Section 41(1)

reassessment under Section 153C follows lines pari materia with Section 153A. D. The First Proviso to Section 153C introduces a legal fiction on the basis of which the commencement date for computation of the six year or the ten year block is deemed to be the date of receipt of books of accounts by the jurisdictional AO. The identification

MR. M.RAMESH,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 390/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

MR.M.RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 393/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 394/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

MR.M RAMESH ,CHIKKABALLAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, CHIKKABALLAPUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 389/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Prashanth .G.S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 148Section 69

natural justice under the facts of the case. b) Without prejudice, the statement recorded on oath from the appellant during the Survey under section 133A of the Act has no legs to stand the test of law and consequently, the order of reassessment

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

natural justice and the order of the lower authorities prevails. 17. Before us, ld. A.R. is not able to substantiate how the opportunity of hearing has not been given to the assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal in ITA Nos.982 to 987/Bang/2023 in assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 is dismissed. 18. Ground Nos.5