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.

25 results for “reassessment”+ Section 49(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai827Delhi698Chennai242Jaipur230Ahmedabad219Bangalore211Hyderabad178Chandigarh147Kolkata120Raipur99Pune84Amritsar82Indore68Nagpur51Rajkot45Guwahati40Visakhapatnam32Surat26Cochin25Patna22Allahabad22Lucknow21Jodhpur19Cuttack19Dehradun10Jabalpur8Agra8Ranchi7Panaji2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 153A26Section 14823Addition to Income23Section 14717Section 143(3)16Section 271(1)(c)12Section 2(22)(e)11Reassessment10Limitation/Time-bar9

SRI.PARAYARUKANDY VETTATH GANGADHARAN,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CALICUT

In the result, the instant appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasparayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) Kerala Transport Company (Decd., Calicut Vs. Represented By Lrs.) K.T.C. Building, Ymca Calicut 673001 [Pan: Adhpg8318B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150(1)Section 153Section 2(22)(e)Section 268A

reassessment may be made shall apply to a re-assessment made under section 27 or to an assessment or re-assessment made on the assessee or any person in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order under section 31, section 33, section 33-A, section 33-B, section 66 or section

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

Undisclosed Income9
Section 2638
Section 153D8

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

section 147 of the Act for barring initiation of assessment after 4 years. Now if the assessee, in view of the said difference, ought to have done so if Form 3CL was available at the time of filing the return of income, why shouldn’t it be so during the course of the assessment proceedings on receipt of the said

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

section 147 of the Act for barring initiation of assessment after 4 years. Now if the assessee, in view of the said difference, ought to have done so if Form 3CL was available at the time of filing the return of income, why shouldn’t it be so during the course of the assessment proceedings on receipt of the said

KOOTHERY NARAYANAN VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, NON COP WARD 2(4) & TPS, COCHIN

In the result, all the captioned appeals and corresponding stay applications are dismissed

ITA 135/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the assessments were completed ex parte under sections147/144 of the Act by making additions on account of undisclosed income. Doing so the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and levied penalties. For AY 2013-14, penalty of Rs.1,49

KOOTHERY NARAYANAN VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, NON COP WARD 2(4) & TPS, COCHIN

In the result, all the captioned appeals and corresponding stay applications are dismissed

ITA 137/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the assessments were completed ex parte under sections147/144 of the Act by making additions on account of undisclosed income. Doing so the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and levied penalties. For AY 2013-14, penalty of Rs.1,49

KOOTHERY NARAYANAN VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, NON COP WARD 2(4) & TPS, COCHIN

In the result, all the captioned appeals and corresponding stay applications are dismissed

ITA 138/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the assessments were completed ex parte under sections147/144 of the Act by making additions on account of undisclosed income. Doing so the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and levied penalties. For AY 2013-14, penalty of Rs.1,49

KOOTHERY NARAYANAN VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, NON COP WARD 2(4) & TPS, COCHIN

In the result, all the captioned appeals and corresponding stay applications are dismissed

ITA 134/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the assessments were completed ex parte under sections147/144 of the Act by making additions on account of undisclosed income. Doing so the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and levied penalties. For AY 2013-14, penalty of Rs.1,49

KOOTHERY NARAYANAN VIJAYAN,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, NON COP WARD 2(4) & TPS, COCHIN

In the result, all the captioned appeals and corresponding stay applications are dismissed

ITA 136/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

reassessment proceedings. Accordingly, the assessments were completed ex parte under sections147/144 of the Act by making additions on account of undisclosed income. Doing so the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and levied penalties. For AY 2013-14, penalty of Rs.1,49

SHRI.PRAKASH R. NAIR,KOLLAM vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/COCH/2021[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin17 Jan 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasprakash R. Nair Dy.Cit, Central Circle Prop. Dhanya Foods Kollam Kochuppilammoodu Vs. Kollam 691001 [Pan:Abfpn4424P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80Section 801A(9)Section 80HSection 80I

section 271(1)(c). Finally, we have explained, even if broadly, as to why the assessee’s legal challenge to the notice u/s.274 is de hors the facts and, thus, invalid and, even otherwise, without merit. 7.2 Accepting the assessee’s explanation of having purchased the omitted goods sold

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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)

reassessment. In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law." 13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman

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

49,410/-, sale of food of Rs. 1,93,722/-, sale of beverages of Rs. 1,23,413/- and made K.K. Mohandas addition of Rs. 1,37,50,000/- u/sec. 69C of the Act etc. based on the seized material found during the course of search and seizure operations. The material, so sized was confronted to the assessee during

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

49,410/-, sale of food of Rs. 1,93,722/-, sale of beverages of Rs. 1,23,413/- and made K.K. Mohandas addition of Rs. 1,37,50,000/- u/sec. 69C of the Act etc. based on the seized material found during the course of search and seizure operations. The material, so sized was confronted to the assessee during

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

49,410/-, sale of food of Rs. 1,93,722/-, sale of beverages of Rs. 1,23,413/- and made K.K. Mohandas addition of Rs. 1,37,50,000/- u/sec. 69C of the Act etc. based on the seized material found during the course of search and seizure operations. The material, so sized was confronted to the assessee during

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

49,410/-, sale of food of Rs. 1,93,722/-, sale of beverages of Rs. 1,23,413/- and made K.K. Mohandas addition of Rs. 1,37,50,000/- u/sec. 69C of the Act etc. based on the seized material found during the course of search and seizure operations. The material, so sized was confronted to the assessee during