Search: reassessment | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

1,674 results for “reassessment”+ Section 41(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,674 Mumbai1,579 Bangalore610 Chennai605 Jaipur369 Kolkata347 Ahmedabad327 Hyderabad253 Chandigarh196 Pune176 Indore130 Surat115 Amritsar114 Raipur104 Cochin82 Rajkot81 Nagpur65 Visakhapatnam63 Karnataka57 Guwahati52 Lucknow49 Telangana45 Cuttack42 Agra37 Allahabad37 Patna35 Jodhpur24 Dehradun23 SC22 Orissa7 Calcutta6 Kerala5 Rajasthan5 Ranchi3 Jabalpur2 Madhya Pradesh1 Uttarakhand1 Varanasi1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14770 Section 143(3)65 Section 14862 Section 153A60 Addition to Income50 Section 153D33 Reassessment27 Section 6825 Section 26324 Reopening of Assessment

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1253/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

Showing 1–20 of 1,674 · Page 1 of 84

...

20

Section 271(1)(c)18

reassessment, tax shall be calculated on the aggregate of the total income as assessed in the earlier proceeding for assessment under section 143 or section 144 or section 147 and the income disclosed in the application as if such aggregate were the total income. FORM NO. 34B [See rules 44C and 44CA] Form of application for settlement of case under

MAHARASHTRA FEEDS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1254/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR

Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

reassessment, tax shall be calculated on the aggregate of the total income as assessed in the earlier proceeding for assessment under section 143 or section 144 or section 147 and the income disclosed in the application as if such aggregate were the total income. FORM NO. 34B [See rules 44C and 44CA] Form of application for settlement of case under

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

ITA/2067/2010HC Delhi27 Aug 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 72

41,405/- is not allowed. The decision of the AO on this issue is sustained.” 6. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal and raised grounds to the effect that the deduction under Section 10A in respect of the Noida unit has to be allowed notwithstanding any current or brought forward

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

ITA/347/2011HC Delhi27 Aug 2012

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 72

41,405/- is not allowed. The decision of the AO on this issue is sustained.” 6. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal and raised grounds to the effect that the deduction under Section 10A in respect of the Noida unit has to be allowed notwithstanding any current or brought forward

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

reassessments.—(1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after the expiry of— (a) two years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable ; or …. ….. ….. Provided also that in case the assessment year in which the income was first assessable is the assessment year commencing

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

reassessments.—(1) No order of assessment shall be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after the expiry of— (a) two years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable ; or …. ….. ….. Provided also that in case the assessment year in which the income was first assessable is the assessment year commencing

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2241/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

M/S. HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2208/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

HLS ASIA LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3708/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 4144/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5855/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HLS ASIA LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 323/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

HLS ASIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT- IV, NEW DELHI

ITA 5511/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Senior DR

reassessment proceedings had claimed the benefit of weighted deduction in respect of warehouse charges on the basis of Section 35B(1)(b)(ix) read with Rule 6AA. The point remains that the head of expenditure on account of which the weighted deduction is claimed by the applicant-company is "warehouse charges". The apex court in CIT v. Assam Frontier

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

ITA/255/2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

41 of 61 section (4). It protects validity of an assessment even when there was violation in pursing the procedure outlined in sub-section 4, despite challenge made by the assessee. However, sub section (7) to Section 124 would come into play and an order of assessment under the said sub-section could be sustained only in very limited class

COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XVI vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

ITA - 255 / 2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

41 of 61 section (4). It protects validity of an assessment even when there was violation in pursing the procedure outlined in sub-section 4, despite challenge made by the assessee. However, sub section (7) to Section 124 would come into play and an order of assessment under the said sub-section could be sustained only in very limited class

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 NEW DELHI vs. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP M/S FERSN N PETALS

ITA/307/2017HC Delhi25 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 132Section 153ASection 260A

41. This distinction was noticed by this Court in CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works (supra). The Court there referred to the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Mathews & Sons v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker) and of the Madras High Court in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (supra) and observed that the word

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -2 vs. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP M/S FERNS N PETALS

ITA/308/2017HC Delhi25 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 132Section 153ASection 260A

41. This distinction was noticed by this Court in CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works (supra). The Court there referred to the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Mathews & Sons v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker) and of the Madras High Court in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (supra) and observed that the word

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 NEW DELHI vs. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP M/S FERNS N PETALS

ITA/310/2017HC Delhi25 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 132Section 153ASection 260A

41. This distinction was noticed by this Court in CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works (supra). The Court there referred to the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Mathews & Sons v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker) and of the Madras High Court in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (supra) and observed that the word

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY

ITA/27/2022HC Delhi11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

41 of 137 (c) Substitute values shall not be established under the provisions of clause (b) of this sub-rule. (4) If the value cannot be determined under the provisions of sub- rule (1), the value shall be determined by proceeding sequentially through Rules 4 to 9.‖ 26. Rules 4 and 5 prescribe the procedure for the determination

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY

ITA/26/2022HC Delhi11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

41 of 137 (c) Substitute values shall not be established under the provisions of clause (b) of this sub-rule. (4) If the value cannot be determined under the provisions of sub- rule (1), the value shall be determined by proceeding sequentially through Rules 4 to 9.‖ 26. Rules 4 and 5 prescribe the procedure for the determination