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.

5 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 273Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore25Cochin18Mumbai12Surat8Jaipur5Chennai5Indore5Jabalpur3Ahmedabad2Amritsar2Hyderabad2Kolkata1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 272A(2)(e)14Section 109Section 271(1)(b)8Section 1396Section 1485Section 1475Section 273B5Penalty5Reassessment4

MERCY EDUCATION TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(6), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly-allowed

ITA 2231/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2231/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Mercy Education Trust, The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Sree Gokulam Towers, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 19(6), Arcot Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. Pan: Aactm 6190M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)Section 273B
Section 2503
Exemption3
Addition to Income3

147 of the Act by the JAO instead of the FAO, effective from 28.03.2022 and ought to have appreciated that the penalty order passed in this regard should also be reckoned as bad in law. 6. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that order imposing penalty under consideration was passed out of time, invalid, passed without jurisdiction and not sustainable

THIRUVARUR LIONS EYE HOSPITAL TRUST,THIRUVARUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVARUR

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

ITA 2531/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2531 & 2535/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2018-19 M/S. Thiruvarur Lions Eye The Income Tax Officer, Hospital Trust, Vs. Thiruvarur 157, Vandampalai, Kangalanchery Post, Thiruvarur – 610 101. Pan: Aaatt 0632P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D. Ambarish, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri D. Ambarish, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 10Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)

147 was completed by accepting the return of income filed by the appellant declaring NIL income and NIL tax liability. and therefore, there was no loss to the Revenue 3. The penalty is unwarranted as the very foundation of section 272A(2)(e) is penal in nature and requires deliberate default, whereas in the appellant's case, the omission

THIRUVARUR LIONS EYE HOSPITAL TRUST,THIRUVARUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVARUR

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

ITA 2535/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2531 & 2535/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2018-19 M/S. Thiruvarur Lions Eye The Income Tax Officer, Hospital Trust, Vs. Thiruvarur 157, Vandampalai, Kangalanchery Post, Thiruvarur – 610 101. Pan: Aaatt 0632P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D. Ambarish, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri D. Ambarish, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 10Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)

147 was completed by accepting the return of income filed by the appellant declaring NIL income and NIL tax liability. and therefore, there was no loss to the Revenue 3. The penalty is unwarranted as the very foundation of section 272A(2)(e) is penal in nature and requires deliberate default, whereas in the appellant's case, the omission

SHALINI SANJEEVI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-7(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 769/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.768 & 769/Chny/2025 िनधा=रण वष= /Assessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(b)Section 273B

reassessment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly an order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed on 13.12.2023 by making addition of Rs. Rs.1,00,65,900/- on account of unexplained investment. During the assessment proceeding notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued three times upon the assessee which were not complied. Therefore, AO imposed

SHALINI SANJEEVI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-7(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 768/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.768 & 769/Chny/2025 िनधा=रण वष= /Assessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(b)Section 273B

reassessment proceeding u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly an order u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed on 13.12.2023 by making addition of Rs. Rs.1,00,65,900/- on account of unexplained investment. During the assessment proceeding notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were issued three times upon the assessee which were not complied. Therefore, AO imposed