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.

251 results for “reassessment”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai885Delhi251Ahmedabad211Jaipur154Kolkata134Chennai123Hyderabad121Raipur106Chandigarh99Pune96Bangalore92Rajkot79Nagpur54Patna50Guwahati48Indore41Visakhapatnam38Surat36Amritsar29Cuttack21Lucknow19Allahabad14Agra10Dehradun10Cochin10Jodhpur8Ranchi5Panaji1Jabalpur1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14788Section 153A77Section 143(3)74Section 153D62Section 271(1)(c)59Addition to Income58Section 14850Section 26345Section 13241Search & Seizure

RISHI GOYAL,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1690/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

carry forward of loss from earlier Assessment Year by reassessing the issue of Short Term Capital Loss incurred by the assessee

BHL FOREX AND FINLEASE LIMITED,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEAL-23, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1181/DEL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahmanbhl Forex & Finlease Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle - 2, 6, Mohan Singh Place, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aabcb8886H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Gini Gandhi, Advocate Ms. Anu Bajaj, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2025 Date Of Order : 14.05.2025 O R D E R 1. The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 11.07.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Imposition Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). In This Regard, He Submitted That Assessee Has Filed Its Original Return Of Income U/S 139(4) Of The Act Which Was Belated Return & Declared The Loss. As Per The Provisions Of The Act, The Losses Declared In The Belated Returns

Showing 1–20 of 251 · Page 1 of 13

...
26
Reassessment25
Reopening of Assessment22
For Appellant: Ms. Gini Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

carried forward of loss and reduced the voluntary disallowance of expenses for which the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the behest

RAKESH BHATT,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1181/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahmanbhl Forex & Finlease Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle - 2, 6, Mohan Singh Place, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aabcb8886H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Gini Gandhi, Advocate Ms. Anu Bajaj, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2025 Date Of Order : 14.05.2025 O R D E R 1. The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 11.07.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against Imposition Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). In This Regard, He Submitted That Assessee Has Filed Its Original Return Of Income U/S 139(4) Of The Act Which Was Belated Return & Declared The Loss. As Per The Provisions Of The Act, The Losses Declared In The Belated Returns

For Appellant: Ms. Gini Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

carried forward of loss and reduced the voluntary disallowance of expenses for which the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the behest

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI vs. AL AMMAR FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross\nobjection filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2180/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44ASection 80I

carried forward losses and depreciation. It is\npertinent to note that the aforementioned revised returns were\nfiled within the extended timeline provided by CBDT Circular dated\n30.09.2020, which allowed filing of revised returns for AY 2019-20\nup to 30.11.2020 under Section 139(5) of the Act.\n\n3.\nOn 26.11.2020, the CPC issued an intimation under Section\n143

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NTPC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3194/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

carried forward and adjusted against profit of subsequent assessment years and not the losses incurred in the year prior to initial assessment year. ITA Nos.2792 & 3194/Del/2016 NTPC Ltd. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in giving a contradictory finding by dismissing ground

M/S. NTPC LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3535/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

carried forward and adjusted against profit of subsequent assessment years and not the losses incurred in the year prior to initial assessment year. ITA Nos.2792 & 3194/Del/2016 NTPC Ltd. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in giving a contradictory finding by dismissing ground

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NTPC LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3590/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3590/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No.3194 /Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs Ntpc Limited, Circle-18(2), Ntpc Bhawan, Scope Complex, New Delhi-110002 7, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0255D

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

carried forward and adjusted against profit of subsequent assessment years and not the losses incurred in the year prior to initial assessment year. ITA Nos.2792 & 3194/Del/2016 NTPC Ltd. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in giving a contradictory finding by dismissing ground

JOGINDER PAL SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 16(4), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2876/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2023AY 2010-11
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 251

carry forward of loss of Rs.40,87,460/-. In view of our decision quashing the reassessment proceedings above, the adjudication

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 941/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. A2Z INFRA ENGINEERS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 812/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

A2Z MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2631/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

INFRA ENGINEERS LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CC-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 942/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 943/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 939/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD vs. A2Z MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 811/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

A2Z INFRA ENGINEERING LIMITED,GURGAON vs. CCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 940/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

carry different connotations, it is incumbent upon the AO to satisfy himself before initiation of penalty proceedings that the case of the assessee falls either under the first limb or under the second limb. A mandatory presence of the requisite ‘satisfaction’ of the AO before initiating the penalty proceedings has been affirmed by the courts. A reference is made

MARVELOUS CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 16(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4099/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Marvellous Cement Pvt.Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, Flat No.305, 3Rd Floor, Ward-16(4), Bakshi House, 40-41 Nehru New Delhi Place, New Delhi-110019. Pan-Aaecm9931F Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Marvellous Cement Pvt.Ltd., Vs National E-Assessment Flat No.305, 3Rd Floor, Centre, New Delhi Bakshi House, 40-41 Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019. Pan-Aaecm9931F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca & Shri Ankur Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Virender Kumar Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : Both The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders, Both Dated 22.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi- 6/10624/2019-20 & Appeal No. Nfac/2017-18/10022053 Respectively, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”]. Both The Appeals Are Arising From The Assessment Orders, Dated 24.12.2019 U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act & Dt. 15.09.2020

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act by making addition of INR 2,58,86,811/- as 2% profit by alleging the entire bank deposits as accommodation entries is hereby cancelled. Ground No.1 of the assessee is accordingly, allowed. 11. Since we have already allowed the legal issue taken by the assessee, the other grounds taken by the assessee

MARVELOUS CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ,NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4100/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

carry forward business loss incurred during the year\nalongwith loss brought forward from preceding year.\n\n21. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.\n\n22. In the final result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA\nNo.4099/Del/2024 (AY 2012-13) and ITA No.4100/Del/2024\n(AY 2018-19) are allowed.\n\nOrder pronounced in the open Court

M/S. ANGELIC CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5535/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234B

reassessment order computing the short term capital gain at Rs. 11,61,04,370/- needs be set aside as the same has been computed without allowing the set off the brought forward losses under the head capital gain aggregating Rs.14,35,23,779/- which is part of the statement of computation of income and the return of income

HINDUSTAN AQUA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 12(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3043/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usm/S. Hindustan Aqua Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 25, Bazar Lane, Bengali Circle-12(1), Market, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaach3298J

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 72

reassessment proceedings and observed that the assessee had indeed taxable business profits in Asst Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 and accordingly the business loss of Asst Year 2005-06 should have been set off with the business income of Asst Years 2008-09 and 2009-10. Since the same was not done by the M/s. Hindustan Aqua Ltd assessee