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.

8 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 12Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai93Bangalore87Delhi84Chennai24Jaipur21Lucknow17Cuttack15Kolkata15Chandigarh15Pune15Raipur12Ahmedabad11Cochin8Hyderabad8Visakhapatnam7Indore7Guwahati6Patna5Surat4Rajkot2Himachal Pradesh2Amritsar2Agra1Dehradun1Telangana1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 14812Section 1478Exemption8Section 254Section 12A4Section 114Section 143(3)4Reassessment4Addition to Income4

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

147. Income escaping assessment – If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently

JUBILEE MISSION HOSPITAL ,KAKKANAD vs. THE DCIT, KOCHI

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

Depreciation4
Reopening of Assessment4
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

147. Income escaping assessment – If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently

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

147. Income escaping assessment – If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently

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

147. Income escaping assessment – If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently

THE DHARMODAYAM COMPANY,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 789/COCH/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav., Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 25

section 25 of the Companies Act. The company was duly registered u/s. 12A of the Act. The original return of income for AY 2005-06 was filed on 30.05.2006 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward

THE DHAMODAYAM COMPANY,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 788/COCH/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav., Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 25

section 25 of the Companies Act. The company was duly registered u/s. 12A of the Act. The original return of income for AY 2005-06 was filed on 30.05.2006 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward

THE DHARMODAYAM COMPANY,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 791/COCH/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav., Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 25

section 25 of the Companies Act. The company was duly registered u/s. 12A of the Act. The original return of income for AY 2005-06 was filed on 30.05.2006 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward

THE DHARMODAYAM COMPANY,THRISSUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), THRISSUR

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 790/COCH/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav., Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Niveditha K. Kammath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 25

section 25 of the Companies Act. The company was duly registered u/s. 12A of the Act. The original return of income for AY 2005-06 was filed on 30.05.2006 declaring Nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, Ward