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.

6 results for “reassessment”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,341Delhi1,148Chennai640Bangalore510Ahmedabad272Jaipur260Kolkata243Hyderabad187Chandigarh137Pune130Raipur110Indore107Cochin68Rajkot64Lucknow57Guwahati52Karnataka47Surat42Patna41Visakhapatnam39Nagpur38Ranchi38Amritsar32Jodhpur28Telangana21SC18Agra17Dehradun16Cuttack15Allahabad12Calcutta6Kerala5Rajasthan4Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Varanasi2Panaji1Orissa1Uttarakhand1Jabalpur1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 26312Section 143(3)11Section 80H10Section 1479Section 260A6Exemption5Section 10B4Reassessment4Reopening of Assessment3Addition to Income

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-1, KOLKATA vs. CHEVIOT COMPANY LIMITED

ITAT/420/2016HC Calcutta11 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

reassessment proceeding without considering the Explanation 2(c) to Section 147 of the said Act ? ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal was justified in law in not considering the fact that the assessee company was not an eligible unit for availing exemption

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , KOLKATA vs. B.P.PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

3
Section 1432
Section 1482
ITAT/143/2021
HC Calcutta
13 Sept 2022

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

Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(b)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

EXEMPTION), KOLKATA VERSUS B.P. PODDAR FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATION Appearance:- Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Senior Advocate. Mr. Anurag Roy, Advocate. .….For the Appellant. Mr. Saurabh Bagaria, Advocate. Mr. Saumya Kejriwal, Advocate. Mr. G.S. Gupta, Advocate. …..For the Respondent. ITAT NO. 143 OF 2021 Page 2 of 16 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) 1. This appeal filed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. P L GOENKA HUF

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the substantial

ITAT/241/2024HC Calcutta06 May 2025

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

For Appellant: Mr. Tilak Mitra, AdvocateFor Respondent: None
Section 144BSection 147Section 260A

exempt from taxation? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was justified in law by not considering the fact brought on record establishing manipulation of share prices of penny stock M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd as part of colourable device to generate fictitious LTCG with

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 order on the ground that the certificate furnished by the Chartered Accountant the figure of loss was not shown, though the figure of the sale proceeds of the trading goods and the direct and indirect costs were shown. That apart, we find that the finding of the learned Tribunal that the assessing officer had no occasion

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

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

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

exemption under Section 10(38) of the Act. The assessing officer further noted that the assessee had made sale/purchase of shares through a stock broker. A communication under section 133(6) of the Act was issued to the said share broker for verification and confirmation of the transactions regarding sale and purchase of shares and reply was received from

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S K M KHADIM AND CO

ITAT/148/2023HC Calcutta17 Jul 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 17Th July, 2023 Appearance : Ms. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. …For Appellant The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.12.2022 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita/278/Kol/2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration : 1. Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Tribunal Was Justified In Quashing The Order Under Section 263 Of The Said Act Ignoring The Fact That The Assessing Officer In His Order Under Section 143[3] Read With Section 263 Dated 23.12.2019 Concluded That Rs.3,63,122/- Should Be Added As

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

reassessment and assessment were same, doctrine of merger comes into play? We have heard Ms. Smita Das De, learned standing Counsel for the appellant. It appears that there is a delay of 27 days in filing the appeal. We have perused the affidavit filed in support of the petition and we find sufficient cause has been shown for not preferring