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.

21 results for “reassessment”+ Section 153Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi544Mumbai192Chennai99Jaipur94Chandigarh84Bangalore81Amritsar42Nagpur40Patna35Hyderabad32Pune32Agra30Raipur26Ranchi22Cochin21Allahabad20Dehradun16Lucknow16Cuttack13Ahmedabad6Kolkata6Guwahati6Visakhapatnam5Rajkot5Indore3Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A48Section 153D26Addition to Income21Section 13214Section 69C14Search & Seizure11Section 143(3)10Section 1447Section 245C(1)7Natural Justice

K.K.RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 520/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: \nShri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central\nRange, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is\npresumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully.\nTherefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Orissa High Court in the\ncase of M/s Serajuddin & Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the\npresent case

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

7
Limitation/Time-bar7
Undisclosed Income7

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 517/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: \nShri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central\nRange, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is\npresumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully.\nTherefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Orissa High Court in the\ncase of M/s Serajuddin & Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the\npresent case

KK RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 518/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2009-10
For Respondent: \nShri Arun Raj S, Advocate
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

section 153D was not mechanical and that additions could be made based on incriminating material found during the search, even if it led to reassessment

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 581/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 582/COCH/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 583/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 584/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 585/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 586/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM

In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order

ITA 580/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)

Section 10(26) of the Act. Certain discrepancies and mismatch in signatures were noted in the loan confirmation letters obtained from loan creditors. The funds were also allegedly utilized for making payment to contractors, payment for civil work etc. for the group concerns. Some of the funds were transferred to bank accounts of family members, friends and relatives etc. whereas

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 509/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A. 4.3 The law in the matter, which would therefore need to be applied, is by now well-settled per a series of decisions by the Hon'ble Apex Court, viz., Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr.CIT

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 508/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A. 4.3 The law in the matter, which would therefore need to be applied, is by now well-settled per a series of decisions by the Hon'ble Apex Court, viz., Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr.CIT

KK LEISURE & TOURISM INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 , KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed, and it’s stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 510/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Paven Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 69C

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A. 4.3 The law in the matter, which would therefore need to be applied, is by now well-settled per a series of decisions by the Hon'ble Apex Court, viz., Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr.CIT

KK MOHANDAS,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 495/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Ramarao, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin& Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case

KK MOHANDAS,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 496/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Ramarao, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin& Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case

KK MOHANDAS,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 498/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Ramarao, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin& Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case

KK MOHANDAS,KANNUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 499/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Ramarao, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin& Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case

K.K.RADHAKRISHNAN,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 519/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 69C

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin & Co. (supra) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 235/COCH/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin & Co. (supra) cannot 8 ITA Nos. 235-237/Coch/2023 K.K. Builders

K.K.BUILDERS,KANNUR vs. DCIT, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 236/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

153D of the Act from JCIT, Central Range, Kochi. In the absence of any material to the contrary, it is presumed that the statutory authorities have acted bonafide and lawfully. Therefore, the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of M/s Serajuddin & Co. (supra) cannot 8 ITA Nos. 235-237/Coch/2023 K.K. Builders