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.

2 results for “reassessment”+ Section 195clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi591Mumbai470Bangalore157Chennai142Jaipur98Kolkata88Chandigarh84Ahmedabad73Raipur42Pune36Hyderabad32Telangana27Cochin21Nagpur18Lucknow17Visakhapatnam15Patna14Cuttack14Surat14Indore10Dehradun8Agra8Amritsar6Rajkot5SC4Orissa4Guwahati3Calcutta2Rajasthan1Jabalpur1Allahabad1Uttarakhand1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 2636Bogus Purchases2Reopening of Assessment2Disallowance2Addition to Income2

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

195(SC). Further, the PCIT pointed out that the assessment officer had to examine each and every transaction and finally assess the correct income of the assessee. However, the assessing officer without arriving at any logical conclusion and without conducting any inquiry made a disallowance only to the extent of 3% of the bogus purchase. With regard to the aspect

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are

ITAT/29/2022
HC Calcutta
22 Nov 2022

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

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

195(SC). Further, the PCIT pointed out that the assessment officer had to examine each and every transaction and finally assess the correct income of the assessee. However, the assessing officer without arriving at any logical conclusion and without conducting any inquiry made a disallowance only to the extent of 3% of the bogus purchase. With regard to the aspect