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.

10 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 239clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi240Mumbai195Bangalore70Kolkata35Jaipur33Lucknow17Chandigarh16Nagpur13Chennai10Pune10Hyderabad9Ahmedabad8Cuttack7Indore6Raipur6Surat4Cochin3Ranchi2Telangana1Amritsar1Jodhpur1Karnataka1Panaji1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)23Section 14718Section 14815Section 143(2)7Reassessment7Disallowance7Reopening of Assessment6Addition to Income6Section 43A

KELLER (M) SDN BHD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1319/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1319/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Keller (M) Sdn Bhd, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, Centennial Square, International Taxation 1(2) No.6A, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan: Aagck 8014M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Ashik Shah, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 239Section 263
4
Section 364
Section 36(1)(viia)4
Deduction4

u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the IT Act, 1961 is completed as under: Returned Income: Rs.44,86,960/- Assessed Income: Rs.44,86,960/- Income Tax computation sheet and demand notice enclosed’’. The ld. AR further referred the paper book consisting of pages (1-375). The ld. AR specifically pointed out page 232 and page 256 at point 3 which

DCIT CC-2(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S GREEN STAR FERTILIZERS LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 868/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 868/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Green Star Fertilizers Income-Tax, V. Limited, No. 88, Spic House, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-2(1), Chennai. Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aadcg-9451-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Hem Bhupal, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Appellant: Shri. D. Hem Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 43A

u/s 145 (2) of the I.T Act. It is to be noted that section 43AA is not applicable to the asseessee as it is effected from the 1st day of April, 2017 and the facts of the assessee case is different. Since section 43A is not :-6-: ITA. No: 868/Chny/2020 applicable as the assets were not purchased from abroad

ACIT, NAGERCOIL vs. SHRI J. RAJ PRABHU, NAGERCOIL

In the result, the Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 2652/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, IRS JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

239/- and in respect of second claim of exemption of Rs. 66,95,823/-. The Assessing Officer dealt on the disputed issue at Page 3 of the order and observed that the assessee could not produce the evidence of construction or purchase of Residential house and brought to tax long term and Assessed income

ACIT, CC - 1 (2),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. CDM SMITH GLOBAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2620/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Harpreet Singh Ajmani
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

reassessment proceeding light of the decision of the Hon'b1e Jurisdictional High Court of Madras, in the case of M/s Sword G1oba1 India (P.) Ltd. VS ACTT, Co. Circle VI(4) in Writ Petition No. 1738 of 2O15 dated July 15, 2015, held that " Under section 147 cases having wilfully made false or untrue statements at the time of original

RAYMIX CONCRETE INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2770/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mrs. Lekha, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 37

section 147, no reassessment could be initiated after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless there was a failure on the part of the assessee to make a full and true disclosure of all material facts. The ld.AR further submitted that the AO had completed the original assessment after examining all relevant records

SABARI FOUNDATIONS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 2744/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:2744/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year 2010 - 2011

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

239/- has been effect as being loss from the sale of land. But there is no such sale of land as per the evidences filed. 3) The tax audit report of the Assessee in Form 3CD states that the provisions of Chapter XVIIB have not been compiled with. If that be the case, the claim of project cot incurred during

A-ONE LEATHERS,CHENNAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4148/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 4148/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. A-One Leathers, The Assistant Commissioner No.15/8, Vepery High Road, Vs. Of Income Tax, Periamet, Non-Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai – 600 003. Chennai. Pan: Aaafa 4576H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Anandh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 14.10.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Raised Read As Follows:- :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri S. Anandh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

u/s 250 dated 25/09/2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeals Centre and direct the assessing officer to consider the contentions raised in the rectification petition dated 12/05/2022. 2. To pass such orders as your Honor may deem fit considering the facts and circumstances of the case and render justice.” 10. The Tribunal however confirmed the FAA’s order dated

M/S. ASHOK LEYLAND LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 602/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

147 of the Act. According to him, the notices were acknowledged by the assessee and therefore it cannot be treated as invalid. The AO is noted to have referred to the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Vama Sundari Investments (Delhi) Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT [2021] 128 taxmann.com 239 and CIT Vs T V Sundaram

ACIT,NCC7(1), CHENNAI vs. M/S PRABHA ENGINEERS, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 944/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Nahar (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194ASection 2Section 40Section 80I

147 is void ab initio. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the factoring and discounting charges u/s. 40(a)(ia) as it is only a bill discounted with is similar to the interest to the charges lor the purpose of Income tax Act M/s, Canbank Factors Limited is not a. banking company regulated by banking regulation

THE DHARMAPURI DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD.,DHARMAPURI vs. JCIT, SALEM

The appeal stand partly allowed for statistcial purposes to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 1188/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1188/Chny/2016 (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) The Dharmapuri District Central Jcit बनाम/ Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Range-Iii No.81/10H, Bye Pass Road, Salem. Vs. Dharmapuri – 636 701 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaat-3148-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Arv Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 19-04-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 13-07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

239; 14/06/2021). The Hon’ble Court, after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. V/s CIT (18 Taxmann.com 282), held as under: - 19. In the present case, the respondent has stated clearly that the provision for bad and doubtful debts is under section 36 (1) (viia). Unless amount of bad and doubtful debts