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.

175 results for “reassessment”+ Disallowanceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,702Delhi1,058Chennai569Jaipur318Bangalore308Kolkata283Ahmedabad277Hyderabad235Chandigarh175Pune154Raipur130Indore114Surat103Amritsar96Rajkot69Nagpur63Cochin61Guwahati57Visakhapatnam54Agra51Jodhpur45Lucknow42Patna42Cuttack41Allahabad35Ranchi31Dehradun12Panaji11Jabalpur2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)74Section 153A73Section 26372Section 14856Addition to Income54Section 14749Section 80I32Section 13230Section 153D30

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 3

reassessment proceedings and the disallowance made by the AO in the aforesaid reassessment order dt. 27/09/2021 passed under section 147 of the Act, by preferring

Showing 1–20 of 175 · Page 1 of 9

...
Disallowance21
Reassessment15
Reopening of Assessment15

SHELJA GOYAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA, KITCHLU NAGAR, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 676/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 270ASection 57

disallowed the entire deduction, reassessed her income at Rs. 31,00,860, and initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A for under

IND-SPHINX PRECISION LIMITED,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. PCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 348/CHANDI/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Mar 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N.Singla (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)Section 80I

disallow the same during the course of reassessment proceedings but it finalized the assessment at Rs.317.15 Lacs which was nothing

ETHIX HEALTHCARE,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE , PARWANOO

In the result, both on the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 147 and on merits of the case, the order of the AO as well as the ld CIT(A) is hereby set-aside and matter is decided in favour of the assessee

ITA 501/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri VivekVardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80Section 80I

disallowance of the said amount again during the reassessment proceedings. 13. We therefore agree with the contention of the ld AR that

THE GAROH CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA, KANGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DHARAMSHALA, DHARAMSHALA

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 66/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

Reassessment proceedings culminated in an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 15.03.2023, wherein deduction under Section 80P was disallowed

THE GAROH CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LIMITED,DHARAMSHALA, KANGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHARAMSHALA, DHARAMSHALA

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 67/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

Reassessment proceedings culminated in an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 15.03.2023, wherein deduction under Section 80P was disallowed

ACIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA vs. M/S HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD., PANCHKULA

In the result, we upheld the

ITA 1458/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Harish Nayyar C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 194ASection 36Section 40

disallowable under section 40(a)(ia)of the Act and this was one of the reason recorded before issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, during the reassessment

MASTER TRUST LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA

In the result, ground no. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 334/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Shri Aditya Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

reassessment proceeding were completed vide order under section 147 r.w.s. 144B dt. 03/12/2021 wherein the loss of Rs. 3,78,93,875/- was disallowed

PREM SINGH,CHAMBA vs. DCIT CIRCLE PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 943/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular return of income on 26-12-2014 and the case was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 30-03-2021. The case was reopened to disallow

PREM SINGH,CHAMBA vs. ITO WARD PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 945/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular return of income on 26-12-2014 and the case was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 30-03-2021. The case was reopened to disallow

PREM SINGH,CHAMBA vs. ITO WARD PALAMPUR, PALAMPUR

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 944/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular return of income on 26-12-2014 and the case was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 30-03-2021. The case was reopened to disallow

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JIND, JIND vs. VIKAS JAIN, JIND

In the result, the assessee succeeds in its cross-objection

ITA 838/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.838/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer Shri Vikas Jain बनाम/ Ward 1 Nav Bharat Steel & General Industries Vs. Jind-126102. Indira Bazar, Jind-126102. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeqpj-3689-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Co No. 28/Chandi/2025 [In Ita No.838/Chandi/2024) Shri Vikas Jain Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Nav Bharat Steel & General Industries Ward 1 Vs. Indira Bazar, Jind-126102. Jind-126102. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeqpj-3689-E (Cross Objector) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suresh Gupta (Ca) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Smt. Tarundeep Kaur (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-09-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Tarundeep Kaur (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69C

disallowed said purchases along with estimated unaccounted commission payment by the assessee on these transactions @4% of Rs.738.35 Lacs which translated into another addition of Rs.29.53 Lacs. 2.3 Before Ld. AO, the assessee raised legal objections to reassessment

DCIT, CC-I, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH vs. VALCO INDUSTRIES LTD., , CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 574/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon'Ble Punjab & Haryana High Court? Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Is Right Holding Such Consequential Order As Void An Initio Ignoring The Facts That Order Passed By Ld. Pcit (Central), Gurugram U/S 263 Has Not Attained Its Finality? Iii) Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Right In Holding That Consequential Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 263 Of The Act As Void As Initio Without Giving Any Liberty To The Revenue To Revive The Proceedings Consequent To Any Directions Or Order

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80I

reassessment was completed u/s 147 r/w 143(3) on 27/11/2017 at an income of Rs 8,87,92,864/- wherein the deduction claimed u/s 80IC was restricted to 30% as against 100% claimed by the assessee. On appeal, the disallowance

INTERNATIONAL CUSTOMER RELATED MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), MOHALI

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

ITA 557/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, as per the order dated 05.11.2019. The assessment primarily resulted in the following additions: an amount of Rs. 27,56,748/- was added by treating rental receipts as undisclosed income; a disallowance

PUKHRAJ SINGH GUJRAL,CHANDIGARH vs. CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 637/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Final Hearing

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Dr Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

reassessment by taking into consideration of the FTC filed by the petitioner on 02.02.2021. The respondent is directed to give due credit to the Kenya income of the petitioner and pass the final assessment order. Further, it is made clear that the impugned order is set aside only to the extent of disallowing

ASHISH SOOD,ZIRAKPUR vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 747/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 253Section 90

reassessment by taking into consideration of the FTC filed by the petitioner on 02.02.2021. The respondent is directed to give due credit to the Kenya income of the petitioner and pass the final assessment order. Further, it is made clear that the impugned order is set aside only to the extent of disallowing

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 757/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

disallowed as bogus purchases. 5.1.4. Aggrieved by the above decision of the AO, the assessee is in present appeal. 5.2. Ground No. 1: This ground is general in nature, therefore, it need not be adjudicated separately. 5.3. Ground No. 2: In this ground, the appellant has argued that the very assumption of jurisdiction to reassess

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 715/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Muskan Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 148Section 250

disallowed as bogus purchases. 5.1.4. Aggrieved by the above decision of the AO, the assessee is in present appeal. 5.2. Ground No. 1: This ground is general in nature, therefore, it need not be adjudicated separately. 5.3. Ground No. 2: In this ground, the appellant has argued that the very assumption of jurisdiction to reassess

ITO, LUDHIANA vs. M/S A.K. EXPORTS, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 800/CHANDI/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of Rs.0.44 Lacs u/s 36(1)(va). The assessee returned loss of Rs.70.98 Lacs. After proposed additions, the income was computed at Rs.15.28 Lacs. Finally, the income was assessed at higher figure of Rs.355.82 which was subjected to first appeal by the assessee. Appellate Proceedings 4. For AY 2002-03, the assessee assailed the validity of reassessment

M/S A.K. EXPORTS,,LUDHIANA vs. ITO,, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue as well as the appeal and cross-objection of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 988/CHANDI/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.799/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.965/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.375/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.800/Chandi/2011 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ito M/S A.K. Exports बनाम/ Ward 1(1) F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Vs. Ludhiana Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.988/Chandi/2010 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 6. Co No/25.Chandi/2010 (In Ita No.375/Chandi/2010) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S A.K. Exports Ito F-1, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Ward 1(1) Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagfa-1903-N

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal(CIT) a/w Shri Vivek
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 80I

disallowance of Rs.0.44 Lacs u/s 36(1)(va). The assessee returned loss of Rs.70.98 Lacs. After proposed additions, the income was computed at Rs.15.28 Lacs. Finally, the income was assessed at higher figure of Rs.355.82 which was subjected to first appeal by the assessee. Appellate Proceedings 4. For AY 2002-03, the assessee assailed the validity of reassessment