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.

7 results for “reassessment”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi83Chennai78Mumbai38Jaipur32Hyderabad30Ahmedabad28Bangalore26Surat21Agra16Patna13Jodhpur11Rajkot11Visakhapatnam9Raipur9Chandigarh7Amritsar7Pune7Indore6Lucknow6Cochin6Kolkata6Cuttack2Dehradun2Nagpur2Guwahati1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 14711Section 14410Section 69A8Cash Deposit7Demonetization7Addition to Income7Section 1486Section 142(1)6Reassessment6Section 250

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1),, CHANDIGARH vs. HARI KRISHAN GUPTA, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 837/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 250Section 68

demonetization period (09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016), reassessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated. 3.1 The AO observed that despite issuance of notices

SH. JAI PRAKASH,MORINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), ROPAR

5
Section 684
Section 250(6)2

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, with the following directions:

ITA 971/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Ravjot Kaur, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250Section 253(5)Section 69A

demonetization period), the case was reopened under section 147. The Assessing Officer framed reassessment on 31.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B

MOHINDER SINGH,ROPAR,PUNJAB vs. ITO WARD-2(2), PUNJAB

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1454/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 20,64,000/- in his bank account during the demonetization

MADAN LAL,FATEHABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, FATEHABAD

In the result, Assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 190/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 190/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Madan Lal, The Ito, Ganaga Pipe Ind, बनाम Ward-1, G.T.Road, Fatehabad Vs. Village Dhangar, Fatehbad 125050 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Acapl2915R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.12.2023 Of Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The A.Y. 2017- 18. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 on 28.03.2021 without having any cogent reasons. The main reason as per para-3 of reasons recorded is that - “3. Sh. Madan Lal has reported income of Rs. 4,03,120/- in his return of income during the year under consideration. The assessee has reported the sales turnover

RACHIT AGGARWAL (PROP.) ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & CO.,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD II(2), LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 858/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.Krishnan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 234BSection 271ASection 68

demonetization period. ITA -858/CHD/2023 & SA-2/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 27 11. It is seen that the ld. CIT(A) has not entered any comment on the above elaborate submissions made by the assessee in his Rejoinder to the Remand Report submitted by the AO. Thus, as rightly contended, the Remand Report was on the same lines as those

CHHERING TOMDAN,SPITI, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAMPUR BUSHAHR, HIMACHAL PRADESH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 170/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Chhering Tomdan, Vs. The Ito, Village Khurik, बनाम Rampur Bushahr, Po Rangreek, Himachal Pradesh Rangrik B.O. Khurik (78), Lauhaul & Spiti, H.P. 171114 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bhxpt8803P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, Shri Viren Sibbal, Advocate & Shri Ashok Goyal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Jcit, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 156Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings are bad in law and non-est as the same have been concluded without following the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC). 4. That the impugned Order had been passed in gross violation of the principle of natural justice and without allowing reasonable

VINEET KUMAR,DHARAMSHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHARMSHALA

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

ITA 1090/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69A

demonetization period cash deposits amounting to ₹15,79,000/- were found credited in the bank account of the assessee. Based on such information, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) were issued from time to time. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to furnish satisfactory