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.

29 results for “reassessment”+ Section 172clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai419Delhi366Jaipur117Hyderabad100Bangalore88Chennai85Surat47Raipur46Indore44Ahmedabad43Kolkata37Chandigarh29Nagpur19Cuttack19Pune17Rajkot15Lucknow15Cochin13Patna13Guwahati12Karnataka12Amritsar11Agra8Jodhpur7Dehradun7Allahabad6Visakhapatnam4Telangana3SC2Ranchi2Orissa1Calcutta1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 153A34Section 14727Section 13(3)24Addition to Income20Section 143(1)11Exemption11Section 1329Section 58Section 2637Limitation/Time-bar

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED , DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 356/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the\nAssessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA”\n10. In view of the above provision, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee stated that the\nCIT(A) has explained the procedure contained in Instruction No. F.No

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 143(3)6
Reopening of Assessment6

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 360/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the\nAssessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA”\n10. In view of the above provision, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee stated that the\nCIT(A) has explained the procedure contained in Instruction No. F.No

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 358/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the\nAssessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA”\n10. In view of the above provision, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee stated that the\nCIT(A) has explained the procedure contained in Instruction No. F.No

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 357/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the\nAssessing Officer with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner under sub-section (12) of section 144BA”\n10. In view of the above provision, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee stated that the\nCIT(A) has explained the procedure contained in Instruction No. F.No

DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S DHG MARKETING PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 990/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcd1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

172 (Allahabad)/r2014l 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad) where Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income found during search operation but also with regard to material available at time of original assessment 3. CIT Vs Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Sahson Alld. flTA No. 270 of 2014] (Allahabad) where

ANIL KUMAR,UNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, UNA, UNA

ITA 121/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am M.A. No. 121/Chandi/2025 [In Ita No.25/Chandi/2022] (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1, M/S Oswal Apparels Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaco-9177-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Gaurav Sharma (Ca) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) Sr. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Sharma (CA)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) Sr. DR (Virtual)
Section 254(2)

172 taxmann.com 424 (Bombay)]. We find that the reliance placed by the ITAT on this decision was wholly misplaced. The issue before this Court in the aforesaid decision was not whether limitation would start from the date on which the order was communicated to the assessee. In the facts of this case, what the assessee argued was that by virtue

DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S CHANDIGARH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 994/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcc6359G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

172 Allahabad)/r20141 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad) (PAGE NO.5 TO 17 OF ANNEXURE) where Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income found during search operation but also with regard to material available at time of original assessment 3. CIT Vs Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Sahson Alld

JASPREET SINGH SIDHU,CHANDIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 335/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Vs. The Pcit-1, बनाम Cr Building, Sector 17, H. No. 1656, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bykps6091L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 263

section 147 of the Act. In other words, if, notice for reopening of the assessment was issued on one aspect, and in the 335-Chd-2024 – Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Chandigarh , 6 course of reassessment proceedings another aspect was discovered, the reassessment order would be valid, only if, the aspect, which led to the reopening of assessment continues to form part

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 428/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings, the deposit of cash was found to be explained by the AO. At the same time, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee society had made security deposit of Rs. 21.49 lacs with a closely related family trust i.e; Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust. The assessee society was thereafter called upon to explain

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 126/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings, the deposit of cash was found to be explained by the AO. At the same time, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee society had made security deposit of Rs. 21.49 lacs with a closely related family trust i.e; Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust. The assessee society was thereafter called upon to explain

J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 685/CHANDI/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings, the deposit of cash was found to be explained by the AO. At the same time, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee society had made security deposit of Rs. 21.49 lacs with a closely related family trust i.e; Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust. The assessee society was thereafter called upon to explain

BHUPESH GUPTA, NALAGARH,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ACIT (CENTRAL CIRCLE ), SHIMLA, HIMACHAL PRADESH

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 441/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 441 & 442/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shri Bhupesh Gupta, Vs The Acit, Aakash Hospital & Central Circle, Diagnostic, Nalagarh, Shimla. Solan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarpg5916A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025 Virtual Hearing O R D E R Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 147

172. 4. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Since the issue agitated in the additional ground of appeal is a jurisdictional one, therefore, in view of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. Vs CIT reported in 229 ITR page 383, we permit the assessee to raise

BHUPESH GUPTA, NALAGARH,HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. ACIT(CENTRAL CIRCLE), SHIMLA, HIMACHAL PRADESH

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 442/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 441 & 442/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shri Bhupesh Gupta, Vs The Acit, Aakash Hospital & Central Circle, Diagnostic, Nalagarh, Shimla. Solan. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarpg5916A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025 Virtual Hearing O R D E R Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 147

172. 4. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Since the issue agitated in the additional ground of appeal is a jurisdictional one, therefore, in view of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. Vs CIT reported in 229 ITR page 383, we permit the assessee to raise

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SAB UDYOG LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 979/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Mona Mohanti, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

section 153A. As observed above, such an action will defeat the other relevant provisions of the Act and also the rights of the assessee accrued therein.” 7. The above decision has also been followed by another co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of ‘Atul Barot (HUF) vs. DCIT” in ITA No.2889/M/2011 & ors’. decided on 26.02.2014. Further

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SAB UDYOG LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 980/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Mona Mohanti, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

section 153A. As observed above, such an action will defeat the other relevant provisions of the Act and also the rights of the assessee accrued therein.” 7. The above decision has also been followed by another co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of ‘Atul Barot (HUF) vs. DCIT” in ITA No.2889/M/2011 & ors’. decided on 26.02.2014. Further

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result of the value of the opening stock and closing stock

ITA 441/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Oct 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Neeraj JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Mona Mohanty, CIT-DR
Section 145Section 145ASection 271

reassessed after loading the element of excise duty at the prevalent rate. Therefore, taking into account the foregoing discussion and in keeping with judicial consistency, the income of the assessee is hereby increased by an amount of Rs. 1,74,99,101/- on account of under valuation of closing Work in progress. Since the assessee has concealed the particulars

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

172/-. This income in/cluded Rs. 49,35,911/- earned as professional income from Canada, on which taxes amounting to Rs. 10,32,088/- were paid in Canada. The assessee claimed relief for this foreign tax credit (FTC) under Section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by filing Form No. 67 on 27.08.2022, after the due date for filing

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 27/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

section 13(1)(c) is to judge the reasonableness of the payments made to the members of the society and secondly and more importantly, there is no finding of the AO that the society is not working towards the objects of education etc. as defined in its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. No case of siphoning off of the funds