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.

4 results for “reassessment”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chandigarh25Mumbai22Pune4Delhi4Jaipur3Bangalore3Ahmedabad2Hyderabad2Kolkata2Lucknow1Indore1Chennai1Rajkot1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 1476Section 286Section 1485Section 143(3)5Deduction3Addition to Income3Section 56(2)(viii)2Section 10(37)2Section 342Section 145(2)

ITO, WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. CHAMAN, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2774/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Chaman, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), H. No. 437, Sector-9, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.103/Del/2024 [Arising Out Of Ita No.2774/Del/2024] Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chaman, H. No. 437, Sector-9, Ward-1(1), Faridabad, Haryana Faridabad Pan: Bfapd6698P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Gaurav, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No. 2774/Del/2024 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 103/Del/2024 For Assessment Year 2017- 18, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The

Section 147Section 250(4)

reassessment proceedings only when her bank account was frozen/ attached by the Income Tax Department. 2.2 As the appellant could not filed return of income as re-assessment proceedings took place ex-parte, a return of income was filed by the appellant on 15-01-2024 before Jurisdictional AO as well as before your goodself. In the said return

2
Reassessment2

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

DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 7(2), NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1495/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 147Section 148

section 145A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. With regards to query related to valuation of project in progress, it is submitted that project in progress are valued at lower of cost and net realizable value. Cost includes cost of land, development rights, materials, services and other related overheads Net Realizable value is the estimated selling price in the ordinary

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. EICHER LIMITED

In the result, we are of the opinion that no substantial question

ITA/958/2008HC Delhi22 Jul 2010
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)

reassessment is well settled that mere change of pinion does not confer jurisdiction to reopen a completed assessment on the interpretation of a particular provision earlier adopted by the AO. The scope of Section 148 does not extend to reviewing its earlier order sou moto irrespective of there being any material to come to a different conclusion apart from just