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.

524 results for “reassessment”+ Section 145clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai590Delhi524Jaipur215Ahmedabad150Chennai130Bangalore127Chandigarh96Raipur84Kolkata84Rajkot56Surat51Agra45Pune45Hyderabad40Cuttack32Cochin32Lucknow32Telangana29Indore22Nagpur20Jodhpur19Allahabad19Amritsar18Patna12Guwahati11Dehradun10Visakhapatnam8SC7Orissa3Calcutta2Rajasthan2Panaji2Gauhati1Ranchi1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 68116Section 14878Section 14774Addition to Income70Section 143(3)57Section 153A41Section 143(2)33Section 15127Section 13224Search & Seizure

KUNDAN RICE MILLS LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, KARNAL

In the result, all the appeals of the department as well as the cross objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 31/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gajanand Meena, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 145Section 153A

reassessment has to be confined to the additions and disallowances consequent to the material found during the course of the search and does not give power to the AO to reappraise and review the already settled issues and assessments. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) has erred both on facts

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Showing 1–20 of 524 · Page 1 of 27

...
24
Reassessment22
Disallowance22

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 109/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

145 of the Act adopting project completion method to account for the revenue and the revenue authorities have failed to bring forth any inconsistency in the books of accounts. The Assessing Officer in the instant case has merely applied the method of percentage completion adopted by the Developer JSM DPL and calculated the income of the assessee completely ignoring

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 1155/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

145 of the Act adopting project completion method to account for the revenue and the revenue authorities have failed to bring forth any inconsistency in the books of accounts. The Assessing Officer in the instant case has merely applied the method of percentage completion adopted by the Developer JSM DPL and calculated the income of the assessee completely ignoring

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD., PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 5067/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

145 of the Act adopting project completion method to account for the revenue and the revenue authorities have failed to bring forth any inconsistency in the books of accounts. The Assessing Officer in the instant case has merely applied the method of percentage completion adopted by the Developer JSM DPL and calculated the income of the assessee completely ignoring

VEDANTA LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD.),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1454/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishivedanta Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Sterlite Circle-26(1), Industries (India) Ltd,) New Delhi Core-6, 3Rd Floor, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaccs7101B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 234BSection 263Section 271

reassessment proceedings for the AY 2009-10. The reasons recorded in writing for the AY 2009- 10 and the Hon’ble HC order are attached herewith in Annexure G&H respectively. We request your honour to kindly take the HC order on record and request not to initiate assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) rws 263 of the Act based

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HCL COMNET LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result this ground is dismissed

ITA 5651/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

reassessment. Ld. counsel referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the assessee’s reply dated 3.12.2008 to the AO in connection with the queries raised is contained in which assessee had given justification for writing off of stock as per the books of a/c as under: 6. Justification for the write off of stock as per the books

HCL COMNET LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result this ground is dismissed

ITA 5898/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

reassessment. Ld. counsel referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the assessee’s reply dated 3.12.2008 to the AO in connection with the queries raised is contained in which assessee had given justification for writing off of stock as per the books of a/c as under: 6. Justification for the write off of stock as per the books

HCL COMNET LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result this ground is dismissed

ITA 5907/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

reassessment. Ld. counsel referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the assessee’s reply dated 3.12.2008 to the AO in connection with the queries raised is contained in which assessee had given justification for writing off of stock as per the books of a/c as under: 6. Justification for the write off of stock as per the books

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HCL COMNET LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result this ground is dismissed

ITA 6142/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

reassessment. Ld. counsel referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the assessee’s reply dated 3.12.2008 to the AO in connection with the queries raised is contained in which assessee had given justification for writing off of stock as per the books of a/c as under: 6. Justification for the write off of stock as per the books

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HCL COMNET LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result this ground is dismissed

ITA 321/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri C.M. Garg :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

reassessment. Ld. counsel referred to page 28 of the PB, wherein the assessee’s reply dated 3.12.2008 to the AO in connection with the queries raised is contained in which assessee had given justification for writing off of stock as per the books of a/c as under: 6. Justification for the write off of stock as per the books

JAGPAL,GURUGRAM vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 2092/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 145ASection 148Section 263Section 263(1)Section 28Section 34Section 56(2)(viii)

reassessment proceedings, accepted the claim of the assessee vide his order dated 21.03.2023. 5. The PCIT, Faridabad found that the AO did not conduct proper enquiry in terms of law laid down by Supreme Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court as well law provided in the Act in terms of section 56(2)(viii) r.w. 57(iv) read with section

SH. SANJAY DALMIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result all the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3795/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri SS Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)

145 shall, so far as may be, apply." An analysis of this sub section indicates that, after the return is filed, this clause enables the assessing officer to complete the assessment by following the procedure like issue of notice under Sections 143(2)/142 and complete the assessment under Section 143(3). This Section does not provide for accepting

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. SALUJA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 3589/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahaydcit, Ghaziabad, Vs. Saluja Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 201, First Floor, A-1, Plot No. 1, Delhi Meerut Road, Cgo Complex, Hapur Chungi, New Arya Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Up-201002 Up-201001 (Pan: Aaucs6233L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)For Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

section 144 r.w. s. 147 of the Act dated 31.12.2019. In the said reassessment proceedings, the bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 49,00,000/- (Rs.45,00,000 + Rs.4,00,000) was again added by the Assessing Officer, which amounts to double taxation. Since, the above amount of Rs.49,00,000/- was disallowed by Assessing Officer in original assessment

ANIL KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 475/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

reassessment u/s 148 qua genuineness of unsecured loan as well as purchases disclosed, considered and accepted during the original assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2013-14 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 10th December 2024 passed by the CIT(A) as well as order dated

NITIN GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 47(4), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 3145/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 4. That the learned assessing officer erred both in law and fact in making addition of Rs. 3,35,164/- on account of purchases made from undisclosed sources only on the basis of statements of proprietors of the firm recorded proceedings, which

NITIN GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 47(4), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 3146/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 4. That the learned assessing officer erred both in law and fact in making addition of Rs. 3,35,164/- on account of purchases made from undisclosed sources only on the basis of statements of proprietors of the firm recorded proceedings, which

NITIN GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 47(4), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 3147/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 4. That the learned assessing officer erred both in law and fact in making addition of Rs. 3,35,164/- on account of purchases made from undisclosed sources only on the basis of statements of proprietors of the firm recorded proceedings, which

WACHOVIA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-27(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 847/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

145/- under section 68 of the Act. 3. Interest under various sections could not have been charged and included in the computation of tax demand. 4. The order appealed against is contrary to facts, law and principles of natural justice.” 5. The case file reveals that there is a delay of 6 days in filing the appeal. Assessee has filed

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1343/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

reassessment such provisions already exist u/s 142(1) of 148 of the Act. Thus, it is mandatory for an AO, after recording a satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, to initiate assessment proceedings, to mandatorily issue a notice u/s 153A of the Act seeking return of income for the particular period and then to proceed to make an assessment only

AMOL AWASTHI,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, C.C.1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1344/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

reassessment such provisions already exist u/s 142(1) of 148 of the Act. Thus, it is mandatory for an AO, after recording a satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act, to initiate assessment proceedings, to mandatorily issue a notice u/s 153A of the Act seeking return of income for the particular period and then to proceed to make an assessment only