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.

3,305 results for “reassessment”+ Section 10(14)(ii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,305Mumbai2,405Chennai921Bangalore818Jaipur608Hyderabad487Kolkata478Ahmedabad436Pune301Chandigarh294Raipur257Indore222Amritsar218Surat204Rajkot163Visakhapatnam162Cochin134Cuttack119Karnataka107Nagpur102Patna91Guwahati90Agra89Lucknow75Telangana67Ranchi54Dehradun43Allahabad37Jodhpur35SC31Panaji21Calcutta10Rajasthan8Orissa6Kerala6Jabalpur4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati3Varanasi2Himachal Pradesh2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 14898Addition to Income66Section 153A56Section 14756Section 143(3)37Section 13236Section 6833Section 153D25Search & Seizure24Reassessment

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. OMAXE BUILDHOME (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5373/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu Assessment Year : 2008-09 Deputy Cit, Vs. M/S. Omaxe Ltd., Central Circle-4, 7-Lsc, Omaxe House, New Delhi. Kalkaji, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaaco0171H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Omaxe Ltd., Vs. Deputy Cit, 7-Lsc, Omaxe House, Central Circle-4, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaaco0171H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 10ISection 4Section 80I

14,901 only on eligible housing projects i.e. built up residential units having built up area within the prescribed limit and unbuilt residential units. Detailed project wise chart has been submitted during course of hearing. No deduction was claimed on commercial area of any project and residential units having built up area more than the prescribed limit. This fact

Showing 1–20 of 3,305 · Page 1 of 166

...
22
Section 26317
Reopening of Assessment15

CHAUDHARY CHARAN SINGH HARYANA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY,HISSAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2225/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year 2018-19]

Section 10Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

ii) That the learned CIT(A), ITD has erred confirming the order of the AO despite the fact that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO are bad in the eye of law, as there is no live nexus between the information and the belief formed by the Assessing Officer. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned

M/S. A.T. KEARNEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result the ground No

ITA 511/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiat Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent) At Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Ray, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 80I

ii. the assessee claimed deduction u/s 10A of the Act of Rs. 39280361/- which was reduced to Rs. 11374842/- by the ld Assessing Officer holding that the assessee‟s profit from the eligible undertaking is „more than ordinary‟ and therefore applying provisions of section 10A(7) read with section 80IA(10), the ld Assessing Officer arrived

M/S. A.T. KEARNEY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result the ground No

ITA 510/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiat Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent) At Kearney India Private Ito, Limited, Ward-1(1), Vs. 6Th Floor, Tower-D, Global New Delhi Business Park, Gurgaon Pan:Aadca1436G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Ray, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 80I

ii. the assessee claimed deduction u/s 10A of the Act of Rs. 39280361/- which was reduced to Rs. 11374842/- by the ld Assessing Officer holding that the assessee‟s profit from the eligible undertaking is „more than ordinary‟ and therefore applying provisions of section 10A(7) read with section 80IA(10), the ld Assessing Officer arrived

TECHNOLOGIES LTD) vs. ACIT

Appeals are allowed

ITA/215/2020HC Delhi05 Jul 2021
For Appellant: -.................................................................... 8For Respondent: - .................................................................. 10
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254Section 35D

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001.]” 12.7. A careful perusal of Section 14A(2) of the Act would show that the AO is required

CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORAITON vs. ACIT

The appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid

ITA - 464 / 2010HC Delhi14 Jan 2011
Section 10Section 11BSection 143Section 147Section 148Section 3

10 (29) of the Act? and (ii) relating to exemption of income which was admittedly derived by the assessee from letting out of godowns and warehouses for storage, processing or facilitating the marketing of commodities. In this case the fact that the Corporation derived income from letting out of godowns and warehouses for storage, processing or facilitating the marketing

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. GE MONEY FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.

ITA/224/2017HC Delhi10 Apr 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 10A(2)(c)

Section 2(iii) approval in view of the interim order dated 10th January, 2017 of the Division Bench of this Court. However, this does not, in any manner, confer any right upon the petitioner. Similarly, the communication dated 20th October, 2016 issued by the Ministry of Mines does not come to the aid of the petitioner. By the said communication

DURESH SHARMA,HISAR vs. ITO, HISAR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 1379/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaita No. 1379/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh.Satyen Sethi, Arti Trana Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.C. Danday, CIT. D.R
Section 10Section 10(10)(i)Section 10(10)(ii)Section 10(10)(iii)

14 06 2017 Date of Pronouncement: 16 06 2017 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, A.M: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17 March, 2016 of the CIT(A) , Faridabad relating to assessment year 2010-11. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee they all relate

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. REGENCY CREATIONS LTD

ITA/69/2008HC Delhi17 Sept 2012
Section 10Section 10BSection 14

10 years expires prior to assessment year 2005-06.” The second document relied on were the Instructions of 2006, dated 31st March, 2006: “INSTRUCTIONS NO.1 OF 2006, DT. 31ST MARCH, 2006 SUB: Deduction under Section 10A-Clarification-Reg. 31/3/2006 EXEMPTIONS SECTION 10A 1. Section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides for 100 per cent deduction of profits

PROVIDENT INV. & INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1003/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiprovident Inv & Industries P Ltd, Vs. Ito, Ward-14(2), 4Th Floor, Ito, A-49, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road, New Delhi Cr Building, New Delhi Pan:Aabcj4816P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Venugopal Nair, CAFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 142Section 144Section 69

ii) sub- section 3 to Section 153 of the Act, the High Court should have directed the AO to pass the reassessment order pursuant to the reassessment notice notwithstanding the expiry of period prescribed in sub-section 2 to Section 153. It is apparent that the AO had not passed a reassessment order and in that context the Supreme Court

M/S HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ACIT (TDS), NOIDA

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1723/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihcl Technologies Ltd, Acit(Tds), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14Th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida Pan: Aaach1645P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

Section 150, as amended with effect from 1-4-1989, does not enable the Authorities to reopen assessments, which have become final due to bar of limitation prior to 1-4-1989 and this position is applicable equally to reassessments proposed on the basis of Orders passed under the Act or under any other law." 14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2458/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

Section 132Section 153ASection 156Section 69Section 69A

10. requisition is made, a mandate is cast upon the AO to issue notice under Section 153 of the On a plain reading of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, it is evident that once search or Act to the person, requiring him to furnish the return of income in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER , DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2457/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

Section 132Section 153ASection 156Section 69Section 69A

10. requisition is made, a mandate is cast upon the AO to issue notice under Section 153 of the On a plain reading of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, it is evident that once search or Act to the person, requiring him to furnish the return of income in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DELHI vs. RAVINDRA SINGH, GREATER NOIDA

In the result, the Appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 2459/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 2456/Del/2023 (A.Y 2011-12) I.T.A. No. 2457/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 2458/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 2459/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014-15)

Section 132Section 153ASection 156Section 69Section 69A

10. requisition is made, a mandate is cast upon the AO to issue notice under Section 153 of the On a plain reading of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, it is evident that once search or Act to the person, requiring him to furnish the return of income in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

ITA/1024/2011HC Delhi02 Dec 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita Jha, Ms Akanksha Aggarwal andFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal with Ms P. L. Bansal and Ms Sonia Mathur
Section 14A

II of38 0 0 0 Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 14 7 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before

CIT vs. SELECT HOLIDAY RESORTS PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of as above

ITA - 1024 / 2011HC Delhi02 Dec 2011
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita Jha, Ms Akanksha Aggarwal andFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal with Ms P. L. Bansal and Ms Sonia Mathur
Section 14A

II of38 2011:DHC:13239-DB 0 0 0 Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 14 7 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

10. On the facts and circumstances the learned CITIA) has erred in confirming the action of the AD despite the fact that the show-cause notice issued under Section 14th of Act order passed under Section 148A(d), notice issued under section 148 and consequent reassessment order passed by AO under Section 147 r... 144 of the Act are illegal

SEEMA GOEL,DELHI vs. CIT A, DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

10. On the facts and circumstances the learned CITIA) has erred in confirming the action of the AD despite the fact that the show-cause notice issued under Section 14th of Act order passed under Section 148A(d), notice issued under section 148 and consequent reassessment order passed by AO under Section 147 r... 144 of the Act are illegal

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 NEW DELHI, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

10. On the facts and circumstances the learned CITIA) has erred in confirming the action of the AD despite the fact that the show-cause notice issued under Section 14th of Act order passed under Section 148A(d), notice issued under section 148 and consequent reassessment order passed by AO under Section 147 r... 144 of the Act are illegal

K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

10. On the facts and circumstances the learned CITIA) has erred in confirming the action of the AD despite the fact that the show-cause notice issued under Section 14th of Act order passed under Section 148A(d), notice issued under section 148 and consequent reassessment order passed by AO under Section 147 r... 144 of the Act are illegal