BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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”+ Section 144C(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi422Mumbai226Hyderabad56Chennai41Bangalore37Ahmedabad23Jaipur13Kolkata13Dehradun9Cochin5Rajkot5Pune5Visakhapatnam4Chandigarh3Cuttack2Indore1Agra1Jodhpur1Panaji1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 14815Section 1479Reassessment5Section 139(1)3Addition to Income3Limitation/Time-bar3Section 272Section 144C2Section 5(2)2Section 149

MAMMAYIL THEKKEPURAYIL MANSHOOR,KANNUR vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), KOCHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 679/COCH/2023[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 144CSection 148Section 149Section 27Section 5(2)

2 Mammayil Thekepurayil Manshoor 3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a non-resident Indian. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2006-07. However, the DCIT (Exemption), Kochi (hereinafter called "the AO") formed an opinion that income

2
Section 144C(13)2
Reopening of Assessment2

MAMMAYIL THEKKEPURAYIL MANSHOOR,KANNUR vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), KOCHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 681/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 144CSection 148Section 149Section 27Section 5(2)

2 Mammayil Thekepurayil Manshoor 3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a non-resident Indian. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2006-07. However, the DCIT (Exemption), Kochi (hereinafter called "the AO") formed an opinion that income

ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. APPOLO TYRES LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 139/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt
Section 147

sections ITANos. 139 & 140/Coch/ 2020 (AYs 2009-10 & 2011-12) CO Nos. 02 & 03/Coch/2020 Asst. CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 143(3) and 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi [CIT(A)] vide a common order dated 10.12.2019, with corresponding Cross Objections (COs.) by the assessee. 2. The sole

ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. APPOLO TYRES LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 140/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt
Section 147

sections ITANos. 139 & 140/Coch/ 2020 (AYs 2009-10 & 2011-12) CO Nos. 02 & 03/Coch/2020 Asst. CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 143(3) and 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kochi [CIT(A)] vide a common order dated 10.12.2019, with corresponding Cross Objections (COs.) by the assessee. 2. The sole

MEETHALE PURAYIL HASHIM,PAYANGADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD INT. TAX , KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

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

ITA 210/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Sri.Muhammed Ashraf, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjith Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

2 ITA No.210/Coch/2025. Meethale Purayil Hashim. appellant filed return of income declaring an income of Rs.2,22,910 on 18th May, 2022. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the AO vide order dated 21.01.2025 u/s.147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act at a total income of Rs.6,22,910. While doing so, the AO made