Search: reassessment u/s 147 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases 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.

136 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 11(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,853 Delhi2,220 Chennai800 Bangalore759 Jaipur641 Ahmedabad592 Kolkata466 Hyderabad441 Pune277 Surat222 Indore221 Visakhapatnam205 Chandigarh193 Raipur176 Rajkot156 Cochin136 Cuttack99 Amritsar89 Lucknow86 Guwahati85 Nagpur74 Agra68 Patna63 Allahabad40 Telangana30 Dehradun27 Jodhpur27 Karnataka25 Panaji18 Ranchi14 Orissa7 Varanasi6 SC5 Jabalpur5 Kerala3 Calcutta3 Himachal Pradesh2 Uttarakhand1 Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)118 Addition to Income66 Reassessment60 Section 14859 Section 26351 Section 14748 Section 244A45 Section 4040 Section 271(1)(c)

THE CHOICE FOUNDATION,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 20/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. K.M.JoseFor Respondent: Sri. A.Dhanaraj, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13(8)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(15)Section 2(24)(ii)

Showing 1–20 of 136 · Page 1 of 7

35

Section 139(1)25

Search & Seizure22

d) of the Corpus Donation received by the Appellant amounting to Rs.2,08, 91,000/- was not the subject matter of the re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Income Tax Act as confirmed by the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 issued by the Assessing Officer. The period of limitation provided for under

THE DCIT, COCHIN vs. M/S APPOLLO TYRES LTD, COCHIN

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

ITA 53/COCH/2017[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Manjunatha G, Am

For Appellant: Sri. A.Santhom Bose [CIT-DR]For Respondent: Sri. V.Sathyanarayanan, CA

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 234B(1)Section 234B(3)Section 234B(4)Section 263

D E R Per George George K, JM This appeal at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the CIT(A)’s order dated 30.12.2017. The order of the CIT(A) arises out of the order passed u/s 143 r.w.s. 263 of the Income-tax Act dated 12.10.2010. The relevant assessment is 1993-1994. 2. The grounds raised

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

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

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 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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of four Appeals by the Assessee agitating the part-allowance of it’s appeals contesting it’s assessments under section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of four Appeals by the Assessee agitating the part-allowance of it’s appeals contesting it’s assessments under section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of four Appeals by the Assessee agitating the part-allowance of it’s appeals contesting it’s assessments under section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years

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

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of four Appeals by the Assessee agitating the part-allowance of it’s appeals contesting it’s assessments under section 153A (r/w s. 153C) r/w ss. 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), dated 31.07.2014, for four years, being Assessment Years

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL.,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 90/COCH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148

D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. The first common ground in first 3 appeals is with regard to reopening of assessment. 2. In the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10, assessment

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 89/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148

D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. The first common ground in first 3 appeals is with regard to reopening of assessment. 2. In the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10, assessment

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL ,KAKKANAD vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 91/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148

D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. The first common ground in first 3 appeals is with regard to reopening of assessment. 2. In the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10, assessment

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL,THRISSUR vs. THE DCIT, THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 88/COCH/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 147Section 148

D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14. The first common ground in first 3 appeals is with regard to reopening of assessment. 2. In the assessment year 2008-09 & 2009-10, assessment

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 247/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.M.Raghunathan SFor Respondent: Sri.Santam Bose

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263

D E R Per George George K., JM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against Commissioner of Income-tax’s order dated 27.03.2017. The relevant assessment year is 2009-2010. 2. The solitary issue that was argued, was whether order passed u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was barred by limitation? 3. Brief facts

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

ITA 268/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kohi [CIT(A)] dated 25.10.2021 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

ITA 269/COCH/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kohi [CIT(A)] dated 25.10.2021 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

ITA 271/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kohi [CIT(A)] dated 25.10.2021 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed

REENA ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD,PANAJI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CALICUT

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

ITA 270/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

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

For Appellant: Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 80

D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Kohi [CIT(A)] dated 25.10.2021 for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 to 2016-17. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed

SRI. ELDHOSE K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THEDCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, appeals for assessment year 2006-07 to 2008-09 and 2010-11 are allowed while the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

ITA 261/COCH/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

u/s 234A, 234B & 234C, is also illegal and unsustainable.” 2.1 These figures be read as under in place of Rs.9,20,624/- and Rs.60,000/- in ground No. 4 & 6: Assessment year Ground No. 4 Ground

M/S SANTHIMADOM HERBAL CITY TRUST,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 921/COCH/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 153C

D E R Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of two Appeals by the Assessee for two consecutive assessment years (AYs.), i.e., AYs. 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, agitating the Order dated 22.06.2022 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Cochin [CIT(A), or the first appellate authority (FAA)], partly allowing it’s appeals contesting