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.

138 results for “reassessment”+ Survey u/s 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai364Delhi317Bangalore138Chennai135Hyderabad114Jaipur113Kolkata72Rajkot62Patna48Ahmedabad48Chandigarh45Guwahati43Amritsar42Pune37Visakhapatnam31Surat27Indore25Raipur22Jodhpur16Agra15Nagpur14Ranchi14Lucknow13Panaji6Cuttack4Allahabad2Dehradun2

Key Topics

Section 14893Section 153C71Addition to Income64Section 133A58Section 143(3)45Section 132(4)44Section 14735Survey u/s 133A35Section 13234Section 153A

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 62/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act conducted on 8.2.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, a statement was recorded from Uday Kumar Salian, one of the partners of the firm. In his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, he confirmed the bogus purchases in these assessment years. There also he offered additional income in these assessment years. That provoked the assessing

Showing 1–20 of 138 · Page 1 of 7

31
Disallowance26
Natural Justice13

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 64/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act conducted on 8.2.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, a statement was recorded from Uday Kumar Salian, one of the partners of the firm. In his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, he confirmed the bogus purchases in these assessment years. There also he offered additional income in these assessment years. That provoked the assessing

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 66/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act conducted on 8.2.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, a statement was recorded from Uday Kumar Salian, one of the partners of the firm. In his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, he confirmed the bogus purchases in these assessment years. There also he offered additional income in these assessment years. That provoked the assessing

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act conducted on 8.2.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, a statement was recorded from Uday Kumar Salian, one of the partners of the firm. In his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, he confirmed the bogus purchases in these assessment years. There also he offered additional income in these assessment years. That provoked the assessing

M/S. YASHASWI FISH MEAL AND OIL COMPANY,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 65/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the Act conducted on 8.2.2018. During the course of survey proceedings, a statement was recorded from Uday Kumar Salian, one of the partners of the firm. In his statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act, he confirmed the bogus purchases in these assessment years. There also he offered additional income in these assessment years. That provoked the assessing

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 173/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

survey has no legs to stand. The assessee via his retraction statement has categorically stated that the declaration was obtained with duress and such statement was not backed by any evidences. The reassessment proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely emanates from the statement recorded u/s 133A

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. T.G. RANGANATH, BANGALORE

ITA 1457/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

survey has no legs to stand. The assessee via his retraction statement has categorically stated that the declaration was obtained with duress and such statement was not backed by any evidences. The reassessment proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely emanates from the statement recorded u/s 133A

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

ITA 1467/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

survey has no legs to stand. The assessee via his retraction statement has categorically stated that the declaration was obtained with duress and such statement was not backed by any evidences. The reassessment proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act solely emanates from the statement recorded u/s 133A

DCIT-CIRCLE-1(1), HUBLI, C.R. BUILDING , NAVANAGAR HUBLI vs. SHRI CHANDRASHEKHAR KOMMI, HUBLI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 753/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 133ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

survey u/s 133A of the Act and also furnishing inaccurate particulars of work expenses. It is a trite law that initiation of penalty proceedings should be made by issuance of notice by the ld. AO specifying the allegation to the level of assessee, which is admittedly absent in the instant case and the case made out by the assessee

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)

133A of the Act was conducted on 8.2.2018 at the business premises of the assessee and certain documents were impounded during the course of survey. Consequent to the search and seizure u/s 153A, the notices u/s 153C of the Act dated 21.2.2019 were issued by the ld. AO for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2018-19. Subsequently, assessment selected

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 44/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri E. Sridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 69B

reassessment\nproceedings based on\nmaterial already on\nrecord is bad in law\nRs.56,66,666/-\n3. The assessee has also raised common additional ground in all\nthese appeals, which is as follows:\n“The learned Assessing Officer is right in making the assessment u/s 147\ninstead of invoking the jurisdiction u/s 153C/153A in the instant case in view of\nnon

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 40/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 69B

reassessment\nproceedings based on\nmaterial already on\nrecord is bad in law\nRs.56,66,666/-\n3.\nThe assessee has also raised common additional ground in all\nthese appeals, which is as follows:\n“The learned Assessing Officer is right in making the assessment u/s 147\ninstead of invoking the jurisdiction u/s 153C/153A in the instant case in view of\nnon

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 41/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 69B

reassessment\nproceedings based\non\nmaterial already\non\nrecord is bad in law\nRs.56,66,666/-\n\n3.\nThe assessee has also raised common additional ground in all\nthese appeals, which is as follows:\n\n“The learned Assessing Officer is right in making the assessment u/s 147\ninstead of invoking the jurisdiction u/s 153C/153A in the instant case in view

M/S. GLOBAL STAR REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,UDUPI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 42/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 69B

reassessment\nproceedings based on\nmaterial already on\nrecord is bad in law | Rs.56,66,666/- | |\n\n3.\nThe assessee has also raised common additional ground in all\nthese appeals, which is as follows:\n\n“The learned Assessing Officer is right in making the assessment u/s 147\ninstead of invoking the jurisdiction u/s 153C/153A in the instant case in view

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU vs. M/S. BLUELINE FOODS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, MANGALURU

ITA 182/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 255(4)

133A(3)(iii) from\nvarious persons (as opposed to statements recorded under section\n132(4) (pages 153 to 175)\niv. The summons issued to the Appellant by the Authorized Officer under\nsection 131 of the Act (page 176); and\nv. Repeated references by the learned AO in different parts of the\nimpugned orders to the carrying out of the survey

DOMMALLUR SHIVANNA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 338/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 133A

u/s 153A of the Act were initiated for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2017-18, vide notice dt. 31-07-2018 and in response to the notice issued under section 153A of the Act, the assessee filed return of income for each assessment year as on 29th March 2019 declaring income as declared in original return of income filed under section

DOMMALLUR SHIVANNA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 339/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 133A

u/s 153A of the Act were initiated for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2017-18, vide notice dt. 31-07-2018 and in response to the notice issued under section 153A of the Act, the assessee filed return of income for each assessment year as on 29th March 2019 declaring income as declared in original return of income filed under section

DOMMALLUR SHIVANNA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 337/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 133A

u/s 153A of the Act were initiated for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2017-18, vide notice dt. 31-07-2018 and in response to the notice issued under section 153A of the Act, the assessee filed return of income for each assessment year as on 29th March 2019 declaring income as declared in original return of income filed under section

PROTEIN ENTERTAINMENT PVT LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 587/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 133A

u/s 153A of the Act were initiated for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2017-18, vide notice dt. 31-07-2018 and in response to the notice issued under section 153A of the Act, the assessee filed return of income for each assessment year as on 29th March 2019 declaring income as declared in original return of income filed under section

DOMMALLUR SHIVANNA NANDISH,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are hereby partly allowed

ITA 335/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)
Section 131Section 133A

u/s 153A of the Act were initiated for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2017-18, vide notice dt. 31-07-2018 and in response to the notice issued under section 153A of the Act, the assessee filed return of income for each assessment year as on 29th March 2019 declaring income as declared in original return of income filed under section