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.

32 results for “reassessment”+ Section 163(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi509Mumbai283Chennai183Jaipur80Hyderabad74Chandigarh73Bangalore63Kolkata45Raipur43Pune36Patna35Indore35Telangana34Cochin32Surat29Ahmedabad27Amritsar27Lucknow26Visakhapatnam24Nagpur24Ranchi24Allahabad22Rajkot12Dehradun8Cuttack8Agra7Karnataka6Guwahati5Jodhpur5Orissa4SC4Rajasthan2Varanasi2Uttarakhand1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 153D29Addition to Income25Section 10A24Section 10B20Section 153A19Section 143(3)17Section 26315Section 14714Exemption13Section 37(1)

M/S.POPULAR FINANCE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 203/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

reassessment proceedings u/s. 263 pending till the decision of the Apex Court in the cases of Shri Arun Thomas & Shri Thomas Thomas for the Assessment Year 2008-09 as per law. 4. Against this the assessees are in appeal before us with the following grounds of appeals: 1. The order of the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

12
Search & Seizure11
Deduction8
ITA 204/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

reassessment proceedings u/s. 263 pending till the decision of the Apex Court in the cases of Shri Arun Thomas & Shri Thomas Thomas for the Assessment Year 2008-09 as per law. 4. Against this the assessees are in appeal before us with the following grounds of appeals: 1. The order of the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 202/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

reassessment proceedings u/s. 263 pending till the decision of the Apex Court in the cases of Shri Arun Thomas & Shri Thomas Thomas for the Assessment Year 2008-09 as per law. 4. Against this the assessees are in appeal before us with the following grounds of appeals: 1. The order of the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THRISSUR vs. THE CSB BANK LTD, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 542/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Modi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 144BSection 147Section 250

reassessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the Assessee which culminated into passing of the Assessment Order, dated 28/07/2023, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act making the following additions/disallowance: Addition of INR.38.24 Crores (under normal provisions): The (a) Assessing Officer observed that the as per the details of movement of NPA provisions furnished

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 41/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 47/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 48/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 44/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

M/S. VIJAYALAXMICASHEW CO.,,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 49/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 40/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.K.RAVINDRANATHAN NAIR,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 46/COCH/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 39/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 42/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 37/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R.PRAKASH,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 43/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SMT. T.C. USHA,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 45/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

SRI.R. PRATAP,KOLLAM vs. THE ACIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 38/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am&George George K., Jm

163 (Mum.). As held by the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Kanchan Tara Exports 138 TTJ 592, had the Assessing Officer given due rebate on account of quality and size of kernels, there could not have been any addition made by the Assessing Officer. Even while arriving at the sale price, the Assessing Officer

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Raja Kannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 109ASection 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

163, 164/Coch/2020 AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 & 2011-12) The appellant is entitled to be granted deduction under Section 10A of the Act, going by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Flytxt Technology P. Ltd., reported in (2017) 398 ITR 717 (Kerala) & the order issued by this Hon'ble Tribunal following the said decision

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 162/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Raja Kannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 109ASection 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

163, 164/Coch/2020 AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 & 2011-12) The appellant is entitled to be granted deduction under Section 10A of the Act, going by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Flytxt Technology P. Ltd., reported in (2017) 398 ITR 717 (Kerala) & the order issued by this Hon'ble Tribunal following the said decision

KRYTHIUM SOLUTIONS P.LTD,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 163/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Raja Kannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Mritunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 109ASection 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

163, 164/Coch/2020 AYs 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 & 2011-12) The appellant is entitled to be granted deduction under Section 10A of the Act, going by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Flytxt Technology P. Ltd., reported in (2017) 398 ITR 717 (Kerala) & the order issued by this Hon'ble Tribunal following the said decision