Search: reassessment | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

59 results for “reassessment”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai803 Delhi576 Ahmedabad288 Jaipur248 Chennai240 Kolkata228 Bangalore139 Chandigarh113 Pune110 Rajkot97 Hyderabad92 Indore76 Nagpur73 Surat70 Cochin59 Raipur50 Guwahati48 Amritsar45 Agra39 Patna36 Lucknow31 Visakhapatnam31 Jodhpur25 Allahabad15 Cuttack10 Dehradun5 Ranchi4 Varanasi2 Panaji2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)61 Addition to Income59 Reassessment40 Section 153A38 Cash Deposit35 Section 13226 Demonetization20 Section 6819 Search & Seizure19 Section 1

SREEPATHY TRUST,THRISSUR vs. CIT, CIRCLE 1, THRISSUR

In the result, both the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 65/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68

unexplained cash credit. The reassessed total income was computed at ₹3,40,53,543. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order

SREEPATHY TRUST,THRISSUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRLE 1(1) , THRISSUR

In the result, both the captioned appeals are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

18

Comparables/TP18

ITA 66/COCH/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jun 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68

unexplained cash credit. The reassessed total income was computed at ₹3,40,53,543. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM vs. ALLEBASI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS (P) LTD, ATTINGAL

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection stand dismissed

ITA 317/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

unexplained cash credit whereas the same has already been added substantially in the case of one of the family member of director. Therefore the addition made resulted in double taxation and is bad in fact and should be deleted. 6. That the assessment order was passed against the principles of natural justice. The order was passed without giving the assessee

NAVDEEP EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLLAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 324/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Navdeep Educational Trust 38/109, Navdeep Mundakkal East 691001 Acit Vs. Kollam Circle Kerala Kollam Pan No : Aabtn0952H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Surendranath Rao, A.R. Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)/ Nfac Dated 26.02.2024 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1061508122(1) For The Ay 2016-17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam Page 2 Of 6

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

unexplained cash credit in the account of managing trustee Mr. Navdeep Educational Trust, Kollam Page 4 of 6 Cletus Austin vide order dated 29.12.2018. However, the reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 TPS, ALUVA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, ALUVA vs. CIJO JOSEPH, ANGAMALY

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 604/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69A

reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 pursuant to the directions of the PCIT in revisionary proceedings.Since the issues are interlinked, both appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common order. First we take up ITA No. 604/Coch/2024. 2. In both the appeals, there were delays of 29 days in filing the appeals

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 TPS, ALUVA, INCOME TAX OFFICE, ALUVA vs. CIJO JOSEPH, ANGAMALY

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 608/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69A

reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 pursuant to the directions of the PCIT in revisionary proceedings.Since the issues are interlinked, both appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common order. First we take up ITA No. 604/Coch/2024. 2. In both the appeals, there were delays of 29 days in filing the appeals

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

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)

unexplained investment made in cash towards purchase of immoveable properties was also seized. Thus, this is a case where sufficient incriminating material has been found by investigation team which indicates undisclosed income of the assessee. The aforesaid plea is also to be rejected in terms of decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in E.N. Gopakumar (75 Taxmann.com 215) wherein

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

ITA 221/COCH/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason that the assessee had not deducted TDS as per sec. 194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

ITA 223/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason that the assessee had not deducted TDS as per sec. 194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

ITA 222/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason that the assessee had not deducted TDS as per sec. 194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before

SANTHIMADAM AGROFARM TRUST,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

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

ITA 220/COCH/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Aug 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 194CSection 234ASection 40Section 68Section 69

cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO also disallowed the advertisement expenses of Rs.4,41,080/- for the reason that the assessee had not deducted TDS as per sec. 194C of the Act. The AO also imposed interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act in the tax calculation sheet. The assessee challenged the above order before

VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PVT KTD,NAGALAND vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

ITA 696/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

cash deposits on protective basis videassessment order dated 18.03.2020 passes u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A). contesting that the very initiation of reassessment proceedings are 4 ITA 695 to 700 & 732 to 736/Coch/2024 Vrindavan Builders Pvt. Ltd. void in law as the AO had deliberately not followed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KERALA vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

ITA 733/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

cash deposits on protective basis videassessment order dated 18.03.2020 passes u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A). contesting that the very initiation of reassessment proceedings are 4 ITA 695 to 700 & 732 to 736/Coch/2024 Vrindavan Builders Pvt. Ltd. void in law as the AO had deliberately not followed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. VRINDAVAN BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 are allowed and the appeals filed by Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 to 2017-18 are dismissed

ITA 734/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

cash deposits on protective basis videassessment order dated 18.03.2020 passes u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A). contesting that the very initiation of reassessment proceedings are 4 ITA 695 to 700 & 732 to 736/Coch/2024 Vrindavan Builders Pvt. Ltd. void in law as the AO had deliberately not followed