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.

5 results for “reassessment”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai38Jaipur26Chennai25Cochin21Hyderabad19Bangalore12Ahmedabad10Pune8Kolkata8Dehradun7Rajkot6Delhi5Surat5Chandigarh4Raipur4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Agra2Guwahati2Indore2Lucknow2Nagpur2SC1Patna1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 271B13Section 14810Section 1476Section 44A5Penalty5Addition to Income3Section 142(1)2Section 1442Section 143(3)2Section 40

M/S. BSI GROUP INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5949/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. Sreenivasa Rao, Sr. DR
Section 271BSection 44A

section 271B of the Act amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-. 1.2 That in doing so, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the basic fact that appellant had duly explained the reasons for delay in filing of tax audit report, which explanation and documentary evidences were 2 BSI Group India Pvt. Ltd. arbitrarily brushed aside

VRINDA SALES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-26(4), NEW DELHI

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

2
Cash Deposit2
Reassessment2
ITA 5568/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2020AY 2010-11
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 44A

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. 4. On the contrary, the learned DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and submitted that no evidence as regard to obtaining the said Audit Report before the specified date, has been filed by the assessee and therefore the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the penalty levied

HANISH SINGLA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(3), FARIDABAD

In the result, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and quashed the reopening of the assessment

ITA 1740/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: For RevenueFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 40

section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961: During the assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished required details/information alongwith books of accounts. Perusal of the ledger accounts revealed that the assessee had made payment of interest of Rs. 11,13,955/- in the statement of taxable income which was not debited in the profit and loss account. By not claiming expenditure through

A K ENTERPRISES ,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 35(5), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6587/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 234Section 234ASection 270A

reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer on 02-02-2024 and by the Ld. CIT(A) on dated 26-08-2025, both are against the principles of law and natural justice. 7. That the interest charged u/s 234ABC and initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A 271AAC(1). 271B & 272A(1)(d) & Fee u/s 234 F are further illegal

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KULDEEP TEXTILES (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2449/DEL/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 68

section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were also remained non-complied. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has given details of the notices sent along with the remark of non-compliance. In view of non-compliance, the Assessing Officer made addition for unexplained cash deposited in bank, unexplained advances to Akariti International Inc. and unexplained investment