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.

50 results for “reassessment”+ Section 189clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi359Mumbai195Ahmedabad82Bangalore76Surat54Chennai50Jaipur39Indore35Kolkata27Raipur26Lucknow15Amritsar15Pune11Chandigarh10Visakhapatnam10Karnataka9Jodhpur7Hyderabad6Cuttack6Rajkot5SC5Cochin4Allahabad4Telangana3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Orissa2Agra2Calcutta1Patna1Nagpur1Uttarakhand1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)95Section 153A75Section 14848Section 14743Addition to Income31Disallowance28Reassessment21Reopening of Assessment18Section 26316

ARTHI BALIGA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NFAC, , DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

section 189 of the Act cannot be invoked. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. PCIT in holding the reassessment

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

Section 80I13
Section 14A12
Deduction12

ACIT LTU 2 CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. WHEELS INDIA LIMITED, CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2700/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43A

section 147 which are for the benefit of the revenue and not an assessee, an assessee cannot be permitted to convert the reassessment proceedings as his appeal or revision, in disguise, and seek relief in respect of items earlier rejected or claim relief in respect of items not claimed in the original assessment proceedings, unless relatable to 'escaped income

WHEELS INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT LTU 1 CHENNAI, CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2770/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43A

section 147 which are for the benefit of the revenue and not an assessee, an assessee cannot be permitted to convert the reassessment proceedings as his appeal or revision, in disguise, and seek relief in respect of items earlier rejected or claim relief in respect of items not claimed in the original assessment proceedings, unless relatable to 'escaped income

K.R.JAYARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 1698/CHNY/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Arjunraj, C.A ""For Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

reassessment — not on basis of mere change of opinion —law same before and after amendment by direct tax laws. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation, 159 ITR 956 held that no case u/s 148 is made out when the facts were known all along with to the revenue while making the original assessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, TIRUNELVELI, TIRUNELVELI vs. MS.AARTHI SCANS, KOVILPATTI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 75/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, CA
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment on the basis of change of opinion will amount to giving the power of review to the AO which is contrary to the scheme of the IT Act. Accordingly it was decided that AO cannot assume jurisdiction to re-assess on the basis of change of opinion on same set of facts. As there is complete absence

SOUNDARI FAMILY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2761/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2760 & 2761/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S Soundari Family Trust, The Income Tax Officer, No.31, Kasturi Ranga Road, V. Non Corporate Ward - 3(2), Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaaas 7287 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 147Section 148

reassessment order was passed. Moreover, as held by the Madras High Court in TANMAC India v. DCIT (2016) 97 CCH 189, Section

SOUNDARI FAMILY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2760/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2760 & 2761/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S Soundari Family Trust, The Income Tax Officer, No.31, Kasturi Ranga Road, V. Non Corporate Ward - 3(2), Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaaas 7287 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 147Section 148

reassessment order was passed. Moreover, as held by the Madras High Court in TANMAC India v. DCIT (2016) 97 CCH 189, Section

SHI vs. U CANADIAN CLEAR WATERS LTD.,CHENNAIVS.DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1) , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2347/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2347/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ruby George, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

189, the Ld. counsel submitted that on identical circumstances, the Madras High Court found in the case before it, the return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act and no notice was issued under Section 143(2) of the Act and thereafter issued notice under Section 148 of the Act for processing the reassessment

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1) INVESTIGATION WING, CHENNAI vs. M/S G TECH STONE LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 583/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 538/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 537/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1) INVESTIGATION WING, CHENNAI vs. M/S G TECH STONE LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 581/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

G-TECH STONE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3053/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1) INVESTIGATION WING, CHENNAI vs. M/S G TECH STONE LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 582/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (1) INVESTIGATION WING, CHENNAI vs. M/S G TECH STONE LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 580/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 36Section 40A(3)

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record

SAKTHI POULTRY FARM,SALEM vs. ITO, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1285/CHNY/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmivenkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Veni S. Raj, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

section 34(1)(b) would have no application.” 5.3 Subsequently, doubts were expressed with regard to proposition (2) afore-stated by the Hon’ble Court by its larger Bench in Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996 (SC) in-as-much as the same also allowed reassessment in case of change of opinion, which, clearly, could

SAKTHI POULTRY FARM,SALEM vs. ITO, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1284/CHNY/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmivenkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Veni S. Raj, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

section 34(1)(b) would have no application.” 5.3 Subsequently, doubts were expressed with regard to proposition (2) afore-stated by the Hon’ble Court by its larger Bench in Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT [1979] 119 ITR 996 (SC) in-as-much as the same also allowed reassessment in case of change of opinion, which, clearly, could

WALLACE SPORTS AND RESEARCH FOUNDATION ,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 3 , CHENNAI

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

ITA 2057/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Respondent: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R
Section 143(3)

reassessment has to be based on fulfilment of certain preconditions and if the concept of 'change of opinion' is removed, as contended on behalf of the Depart ment, then, in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One 14 must treat the concept of 'change of opinion' as an in-built test to check abuse of power

D.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1209/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate ) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment or recomputation under Section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in the notice, a return o{his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant