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.

10 results for “disallowance”+ Reassessmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,740Delhi2,373Chennai1,068Bangalore810Kolkata680Ahmedabad368Jaipur366Hyderabad291Surat195Pune187Chandigarh176Raipur144Indore141Amritsar131Rajkot94Cochin84Karnataka81Visakhapatnam71Nagpur69Lucknow68Cuttack58Guwahati58Agra51Jodhpur45Patna44Allahabad35Ranchi32Telangana25Dehradun20SC13Panaji11Calcutta10Kerala9Punjab & Haryana5Varanasi4Orissa4Jabalpur2Gauhati2

Key Topics

Section 80H10Section 143(3)8Section 1478Section 260A7Section 2636Addition to Income6Reopening of Assessment5Disallowance5Reassessment5Section 271(1)(c)

AI CHAMPDANY INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - II KOLKATA , WEST BENGAL

In the result, we find that the order of the

ITA/32/2005HC Calcutta16 Sept 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 80H

reassessment on 30.3.2001 under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act disallowing the deduction under Section 80HHC

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. MRS PREMLATA TEKRIWAL

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are

ITAT/29/2022HC Calcutta22 Nov 2022

Bench: This Court In Itat/27/2022, Itat/32/2022 And

4
Section 153A4
Bogus Purchases4
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

disallowed as being bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer was directed to reassess the income of the assessee for the relevant

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. BINOD KUMAR TEKRIWAL

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the

ITAT/32/2022HC Calcutta15 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 15Th July, 2022. Appearance :- Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant

Section 260ASection 263Section 69C

disallowed as being bogus purchases. The 8 Assessing Officer was directed to reassess the income of the assessee for the relevant

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT & TP) vs. M/S. DONGFANG ELECTRIC CORPORATION

ITAT/66/2018HC Calcutta09 Jul 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 139Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

disallowed in computing the total income or loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reassessment and the said

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, KOLKATA vs. SICPA INDIA LTD.

The appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect

ITAT/36/2017HC Calcutta10 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 260A

reassessment order passed under Sections 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as bad in law in the case of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2002-2003 in deleting the disallowance

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRA vs. JOY PARTNERSHIP MINING CENTRE

ITAT/71/2018HC Calcutta15 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

reassessment order, has become infructuous. Aggrieved with the order of the ITAT, the revenue has filed the present appeal. Submissions 7. Learned counsel for the revenue submits that as per the original assessment order, the respondent assessee has disclosed a net profit of Rs.58,77,595/-, to which, a sum of Rs.18,74,034/- was added on account of disallowance

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. RAM RATAN MODI

ITAT/157/2022HC Calcutta13 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE T.S. SIVAGNANAM, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 158BSection 260A

reassessment order of 30.03.2000 in the case of M/s. SWC which is not the case of the Second AO and so the finding of AO is per se contradictory and in this context the Ld. A.R. explained that in the case of M/s. SWC in the first round the AO noted that M/s. SWC has deposited Rs. 89.2 crores

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA vs. M/S. KESORAM IDUSTRIES LIMITED

ITA/1/2014HC Calcutta06 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 6Th May 2024. Appearance: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Advocate Mr. Ankan Das, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Advocate. … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri Soumen Bhattacharjee, Learned Junior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sm. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2. This Appeal Was Admitted By This Court By Order Dated 31St July 2013 On The Following Substantial Question Of Law:- “Whether On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Erred In Law In Setting Aside The Order Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax, 1961?”

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

disallowing the sum of Rs.28,89,56,562/- paid as interest on borrowed capital for acquisition of fixed assets under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act inasmuch as the said assets have been acquired for the purposes of expansion of existing business of your petitioner and the findings of the Tribunal to this extent is unreasonable, arbitrary and perverse

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/84/2025HC Calcutta04 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

disallowances of expenses related to purchases from Sancheti Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. which were "bogus" in nature ? c) WHETHER in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in not following the binding decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Priya Blue Industries P Ltd. Vs. ACIT

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. M/S PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT LTD

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/86/2025HC Calcutta04 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

disallowances of expenses related to purchases from Sancheti Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. which were "bogus" in nature ? c) WHETHER in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in not following the binding decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Priya Blue Industries P Ltd. Vs. ACIT