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.

8 results for “reassessment”+ Section 80Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur19Mumbai16Lucknow8Delhi8Cochin7Pune6Hyderabad5Cuttack4Bangalore4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Chennai3Surat2Nagpur2Ahmedabad2Kolkata2Ranchi1Varanasi1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 14712Section 153A8Section 80C8Section 806Section 14A5Addition to Income5Deduction5Section 80H4Section 1443Section 148

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/444/2011HC Delhi18 Jul 2012
Section 14ASection 2(45)Section 5Section 80ASection 80A(1)Section 80B(5)Section 80P(2)(d)

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. xxxx 80-A. Deductions to be made in computing total income.—(1) In computing the total income

MMTC LTD. vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1),,

The appeal is allowed, with aforesaid consequences, as directed in ground wise findings

3
Disallowance3
Search & Seizure2
ITA 1722/DEL/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Mmtc Ltd., Scope Vs. Dcit, Complex, Circle-5(1) Core 1,7, Institutional Area, New Delhi Lodhi Road, New Delhi- 110003 Pan : (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80Section 80H

reassessed in the light of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Shri Ram Honda Powers. Equipment Ltd. (2007) 289 ITR 475 (Del) and relying the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of IPCA Labortries Ltd. vs DCIT ( 266 ITR 521). The bench had held that provisions of Section 80HHC there is no infirmity

KRISHAN PAL,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD 2(2)-GURGAON, GURGAON

Appeal is allowed

ITA 139/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 139/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Krishan Pal, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca M R Sahu, Ward-2(2), House No. 651, 1St Floor, Sector- Gurgaon, 10A, Near G. D. Goenka Public Haryana-22001 School, Gurgaon-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Asqpk6236J Assessee By: Sh. M. R. Sahu, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1068016367(1) Dated 27.08.2024, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 80C

80C claim of Rs.1,00,000/- as not accepted which stands upheld in the lower appellate discussion. It is in this factual backdrop that the assessee’s case before us is that given the fact that the faceless regime in question got notified on 29.03.2022, the faceless assessment framed in his case on 28.03.2022 is non-est in the eyes

MANAK GARG,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 59(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3498/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11 Manak Garg (Individual), Vs. Ito, Ward 59(1), F-17, West Vinod Nagar, New Delhi Delhi-1100 92 Pan: Aaccn8595N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 80C

80C without any evidence. 6. As we go through the grounds raised, we find that there is an averment that there was no proper service of notice under Section 149 of the Act, however, with that regard to same there is no submission or material on record. The claim of assessee is that reassessment

NAND KISHORE GUPTA,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD 2(3), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Neelam Kumar JainFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash
Section 112Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 50(2)Section 50CSection 80C

80C amounting to Rs. 95,383/- and under section SOD of Rs. 15,000/-. The Appellant duly submitted the evidence of depositing premium before CIT(A) with submissions dated 08.10.2018. 3.6 That the Learned Assessing Officer erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Otherwise also, interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C are not computed

SANJAY JAIN,BHILWARA, RAJASTHAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1384/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 250

80C of the Act without appreciating the submissions made by the appellant. As such, the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- is bad in law and may please be deleted. 6. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law while upholding the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer of Rs.60

CIT -15(2), NEW DELHI vs. LOGIX BUILDESTATE PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1380/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153DSection 250

80C of the Act without appreciating the submissions made by the appellant. As such, the addition of Rs.1,00,000/- is bad in law and may please be deleted. 6. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law while upholding the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer of Rs.60

SH. AYUSH BIYANI ,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4113/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshshri Ayush Biyani, Vs. Ito, Kalani & Co Llp, Chartered Ward-1(3), Accountants, 5Th Floor, Gurgaon Milestone Building, Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur Pan: Alrpb1245J Assessee By : Shri P. C. Parwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148ASection 80ASection 80C

reassessment proceedings were framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 12.03.2024. The return of income of ₹13,18,200/- was filed by the assessee. In the said return, the assessee inadvertently omitted the claim of deduction u/s 80C of the Act in the sum of ₹1,50,000/-. Accordingly, the assessee by way of additional ground before