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.

6 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 245Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai48Hyderabad43Delhi27Allahabad16Indore11Pune9Chandigarh9Surat8Cochin7Chennai6Kolkata6Jaipur4Bangalore4Varanasi2Lucknow1Telangana1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)8Section 234B8Section 234B(4)8Section 1477Addition to Income6Section 153C5Unexplained Investment5Section 2634Section 234A

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

ITA 1793/CHNY/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.M.Karunakaran,AdvoateFor Respondent: Mr.Vijayaprabha, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234B(4)Section 263

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act and the order was passed and dated as 20.03.2013. In the said order, the assessing officer added a sum of `4,81,546/- as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the ITA Nos.1791 to 1794/Mds./17 :- 7 -: Act on proportionate basis for four assessment years from assessment year

4
Section 244A3

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

ITA 1792/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.M.Karunakaran,AdvoateFor Respondent: Mr.Vijayaprabha, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234B(4)Section 263

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act and the order was passed and dated as 20.03.2013. In the said order, the assessing officer added a sum of `4,81,546/- as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the ITA Nos.1791 to 1794/Mds./17 :- 7 -: Act on proportionate basis for four assessment years from assessment year

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

ITA 1794/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.M.Karunakaran,AdvoateFor Respondent: Mr.Vijayaprabha, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234B(4)Section 263

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act and the order was passed and dated as 20.03.2013. In the said order, the assessing officer added a sum of `4,81,546/- as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the ITA Nos.1791 to 1794/Mds./17 :- 7 -: Act on proportionate basis for four assessment years from assessment year

S.VIJAYALAKSHMI ,PUDUCHERRY vs. ITO WARD I(2) , PONDICHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment

ITA 1791/CHNY/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.M.Karunakaran,AdvoateFor Respondent: Mr.Vijayaprabha, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 234B(4)Section 263

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act and the order was passed and dated as 20.03.2013. In the said order, the assessing officer added a sum of `4,81,546/- as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the ITA Nos.1791 to 1794/Mds./17 :- 7 -: Act on proportionate basis for four assessment years from assessment year

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), CHENNAI vs. RATHINAM PRABAKARAN, KARUR

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

ITA 1154/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1154/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Dy. Commissioner Of Rathinam Prabakaran, Income Tax, Vs. 39, Narasimmapuram North, Central Circle-2(3), Karur - 639 001. Chennai. [Pan: Aaipp 4501B]

For Appellant: Shri N. V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

reassessment proceeding explained that he has not advanced any loan to Shri Seetharaman during the previous year relevant to A.Y 2015-16 in his individual capacity and Shri Seetharaman has already offered the loan amount in his hand before the Hon’ble IT Settlement Commission. However, the A.O did not accept the assessee’s explanation and noted that Shri Seetharaman

THE MADRAS SEVA SADAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTION,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1246/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1246/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2022-23 The Madras Seva Sadan, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.7, Shenstone Park, Income Tax (Exemption), Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaatt2871J] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R.Venkatanarayanan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri R.Venkatanarayanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 140ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 155Section 199Section 206CSection 244A

reassessment are pending in respect of an assessee, in computing the period for determining the additional interest payable to such assessee under this sub-section, the period beginning from the date on which such refund is withheld by the Assessing Officer in accordance with and subject to provisions of sub-section (2) of section 245 and ending 4[with