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.

17 results for “reassessment”+ Section 244A(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai58Delhi49Cochin17Allahabad16Bangalore13Kolkata11Ahmedabad11Chandigarh10Indore7Chennai4Jaipur3Patna2Raipur2Amritsar1Karnataka1Pune1SC1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Addition to Income17Exemption13Section 153A4Section 234A4Section 153C4

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 917/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

b). Accordingly, the interest chargeable would be u/s.234A, from 01.8.2007 (01.8.2008) to 28.12.2010. The amendment to an assessment pursuant to an order, inter alia, u/s.254, as in the instant case, only impacts interest u/s. 234A(1) in terms of the principal sum, on variation, downward or upward, in assessed tax. The same would not operate to extend the period

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 919/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

b). Accordingly, the interest chargeable would be u/s.234A, from 01.8.2007 (01.8.2008) to 28.12.2010. The amendment to an assessment pursuant to an order, inter alia, u/s.254, as in the instant case, only impacts interest u/s. 234A(1) in terms of the principal sum, on variation, downward or upward, in assessed tax. The same would not operate to extend the period

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,KOCHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 918/COCH/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

b). Accordingly, the interest chargeable would be u/s.234A, from 01.8.2007 (01.8.2008) to 28.12.2010. The amendment to an assessment pursuant to an order, inter alia, u/s.254, as in the instant case, only impacts interest u/s. 234A(1) in terms of the principal sum, on variation, downward or upward, in assessed tax. The same would not operate to extend the period

M/S SANTHIMADOM AYURNIKETHAN HEALTH RESORT & RESEARCH INSTITUTE TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 916/COCH/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 May 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

b). Accordingly, the interest chargeable would be u/s.234A, from 01.8.2007 (01.8.2008) to 28.12.2010. The amendment to an assessment pursuant to an order, inter alia, u/s.254, as in the instant case, only impacts interest u/s. 234A(1) in terms of the principal sum, on variation, downward or upward, in assessed tax. The same would not operate to extend the period

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which

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

1. 8.4 Further, as held by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandha Metals Corporation 273ITR 262 when the return of the assessee accepted by the Commercial Taxes Department is binding on the Income Tax authorities, the Assessing Officer is not justified to reject the value of the closing stock declared by the assessees which