Search: reassessment | 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.

201 results for “reassessment”+ Revision u/s 263clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai644 Delhi453 Chennai275 Kolkata253 Bangalore201 Jaipur170 Ahmedabad109 Chandigarh82 Hyderabad79 Pune75 Raipur58 Indore57 Rajkot48 Cochin39 Cuttack39 Visakhapatnam29 Amritsar27 Nagpur25 Agra24 Patna21 Allahabad21 Lucknow15 Surat15 Jodhpur14 Karnataka10 Jabalpur7 Dehradun7 Guwahati5 Ranchi4 Varanasi3 Calcutta3 SC2 Himachal Pradesh2 Kerala1 Rajasthan1 Telangana1 Uttarakhand1 Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)73 Section 153A68 Section 14A59 Addition to Income59 Section 153C58 Section 26357 Section 14840 Section 13236 Section 133A28 Disallowance

M/S. TOKAI RIKA MINDA INDIA PVT. LTD,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(CENTRAL), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 781/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 92C

u/s. 263 of the Act, since the reassessment order itself is bad in law, whether such order can be revised

Showing 1–20 of 201 · Page 1 of 11

...

27

Reopening of Assessment14

SHRI. K. MUNIRAJU,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed by assessee for asst

ITA 1376/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev C Nulvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Reddy, Standing Counsel to Dept. (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

revise the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. II Page 11 of 26 ITA No.1376-1379/Bang/2019 5. Section 153D states that 'No order of assessment or reassessment

SRI. BANDIGADI CHANDRAPPASHETTY RAJASHEKARA,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, SHIMOGA

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

ITA 773/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can‟t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

SRI. BANDIGADI CHANDRAPPASHETTY RAJASHEKARA,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, SHIVAMOGGA

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

ITA 772/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can‟t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

BANDIGADI CHANDRAPPASHETTY RAJASHEKARAPPA,SHIMOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , SHIMOGA

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

ITA 306/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can‟t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

BANDIGADI CHANDRAPPASHETTY RAJASHEKARAPPA,SHIMOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , SHIMOGA

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

ITA 307/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can‟t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

BHARATH BAFNA ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 880/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Srinandini Das, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 26Section 263

revise the order u/s. 263 of the Act by the ld. PCIT. 7. The ld. CIT(DR) submits that when in the reassessment

B N PRASANNA KUMAR,MANDYA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MYSORE

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

ITA 466/BANG/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ravi Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Srinivas T.Bidari, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 69A

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He cannot usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

SRI. H. NAGARAJA,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 613/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Seshachala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)

revision vested with him u/s 263. The CIT, in his order u/s 263 dated 28/03/2013 directed the AO to make addition of Rs.18,78,84,039/- - (i) on account of donation Rs.1,50,000/-, (ii) Rs.2,71,13,658/- towards cost of purchase of land which was sold in the subsequent assessment year i.e. 2009-10, (iii) Rs.7

HARISHA,MYSORE vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 816/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran D., D.R

Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 263

revision u/s 263 of the Act. The ld. A.R. also argued about the other grounds on merits and also filed a paper book and also relied on the order of this Tribunal in ITA Nos.6 & 7/Bang/2021 dated 21.9.2022 for the AY 2013-14 in the case of Bashir Ahmed Abdurrahman Matte Vs. PCIT. 4. The ld. D.R. relied

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1215/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1216/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1213/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

SHRI JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1214/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

revised u/s 263 of the Act. In paragraph 10 of the order the Hon'ble High Court observed that once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any disclosed income found during the search or and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return

M/S. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 11(5) PRESENTLY CIRCLE 4(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA 282/BANG/2017[2002 - 2003]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

u/s 263(2) of the I.T.Act would run from original assessment order and not the reassessment order. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Apex Court reads as follow:- “25. We, therefore, are clearly of the opinion that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and, in particular, having regard to the fact that the Commissioner

SHRI. POLLAMREDDY SREEDHAR REDDY,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

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

ITA 429/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri R.E. Balasubramaniyan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 263(1)

revision of the order. This view is supported by the Hon'ble Pollam Reddy Shreedhar Reddy, Bangalore Page 5 of 16 Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v CIT (243 ITR 83). 4. The ld. D.R. submitted that AO has not made proper enquiry on the issue dealt by the ld. Principal CIT and therefore, Deputy

CONFIDENT PROJECTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 409/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 80I

revise the assessment orders completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T.Act. When the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T.Act, cannot deny the claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the I.T.Act (in absence of incriminating material), the Pr.CIT in a revisionary proceeding cannot direct the AO to disallow the claim of deduction. In other words