Search: reassessment u/s 147 | 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.

237 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 217(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi237 Mumbai187 Bangalore81 Chennai66 Jaipur63 Kolkata21 Cuttack21 Raipur16 Hyderabad13 Lucknow10 Ahmedabad9 Pune9 Chandigarh7 Jodhpur5 Cochin5 Telangana5 Patna5 Rajkot5 Karnataka4 Amritsar4 Indore3 Guwahati2 Surat2 Orissa1 Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 147158 Section 148143 Section 143(3)68 Addition to Income47 Section 6835 Section 153C33 Reassessment26 Section 143(2)23 Section 151

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)

Showing 1–20 of 237 · Page 1 of 12

...

18

Section 143(1)17

Reopening of Assessment16

Limitation/Time-bar14

217 and 273. Interest for defaults in furnishing return of income. 234A. (1) Where the return of income for any assessment year under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4) of section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, is furnished after the due date, or is not furnished, the assessee shall

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)

217 and 273. Interest for defaults in furnishing return of income. 234A. (1) Where the return of income for any assessment year under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4) of section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, is furnished after the due date, or is not furnished, the assessee shall

ACIT, CC-30, NEW DELHI vs. AMARJYOTI VANIJYA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4047/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sushma Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 153CSection 68

217] has held that: “At this stage, as the proceedings are at the very initial state, the 'satisfaction' neither is required to be firm nor conclusive. The 'satisfaction' required is to decide whether or not block assessment proceedings are required to be initiated. But 'satisfaction' has to be 14 I.T.As. No. 4046, 4047 & 4048/DEL/2017 founded on reasonableness. It cannot

ACIT, CC-30, NEW DELHI vs. AMARJYOTI VANIJYA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4046/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sushma Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 153CSection 68

217] has held that: “At this stage, as the proceedings are at the very initial state, the 'satisfaction' neither is required to be firm nor conclusive. The 'satisfaction' required is to decide whether or not block assessment proceedings are required to be initiated. But 'satisfaction' has to be 14 I.T.As. No. 4046, 4047 & 4048/DEL/2017 founded on reasonableness. It cannot

ACIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI vs. AMARJYOTI VANIJYA (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4048/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sushma Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 153CSection 68

217] has held that: “At this stage, as the proceedings are at the very initial state, the 'satisfaction' neither is required to be firm nor conclusive. The 'satisfaction' required is to decide whether or not block assessment proceedings are required to be initiated. But 'satisfaction' has to be 14 I.T.As. No. 4046, 4047 & 4048/DEL/2017 founded on reasonableness. It cannot

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

217 (All.)  CIT v. Arunanada Textiles P. Ltd: 333 ITR 116 (Kar)  CIT v. Metachem Industries: 245 ITR 160 (MP)  DCIT v. Rohini Builders: 256 ITR 360 (Guj)  CIT v. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd.: 215 Taxman 157 (Guj.)(Mag.)  Nemichand Kothari V. CIT: 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati)  CIT v. Talbros Engineering

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPLENDOR LANDBASE LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2461/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanti.T.A. No.2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner M/S Splendor Landbase Of Income, Central Vs. Limited, Circle-3, F-38/2, Splendor House, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 215/Del/2016 In I.T.A. No. 2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 M/S Splendor Landbase Assistant Commissioner Limited, Vs. Of Income, Central Circle- F-38/2, Splendor House, 3, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kr. Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154

reassessment was in consequence of return filed in response to notice u/s 153A, which statutorily being a return u/s 139(1) provisions of s. 80 of the Act do not apply and the assessee is eligible to carry forward of the loss. I do not agree with the contentions of the appellant since sub-section (3) of s. 139 very

SUSHIL BANSAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 57(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4441/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69C

C) No.11504 of 2016, dt. 11.04.2017, Delhi High Court, on the similar fact situation, observed as under: “6. Having considered the aforesaid contentions, the Court is of the view that where a third party has been proceeded against as a recipient of the donation/capitation fees insofar as the said amount was not offered for assessment, it would have to undergo

ACIT CIRCLE-59(1), NEW DELHI vs. NEERAJ KUMAR SINGHAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

u/s 148 has to stand or fall on the basis of "reasons recorded. I.T.A. No.283/Del/2021 6 The Hon'ble Delhi Court in HCL Technolosies Ltd, o. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (W.P. (C.) 8164/2010 decided on 20/7/2017) has held as follows: "16. The AO has not made the effort of disclosing, in the reasons, what according to him constituted

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 5(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

c): No valid reason to believe-initiation of reassessment invalid BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors vs. ACIT 50. Under the scheme of the Act, the assessing officer can initiate proceedings under section 147 of the Act only if he has "reason to believe" that any income has escaped assessment. Such belief has to be arrived at by the assessing officer

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), NEW DEL;HI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

c): No valid reason to believe-initiation of reassessment invalid BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors vs. ACIT 50. Under the scheme of the Act, the assessing officer can initiate proceedings under section 147 of the Act only if he has "reason to believe" that any income has escaped assessment. Such belief has to be arrived at by the assessing officer

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

217 ITR 1 (Guj) - Multiscreen Media (P) Ltd. vs UOI 324 ITR 54 (Bom.) - ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 448 (SC) 17. Reason to believe', it is submitted, cannot be equated with reason to suspect [refer Krown Agro Foods (P) Ltd vx ACIT: 375 ITR 460 (Deli. GS P a g e | 10 Lasco Chemie

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- NOIDA, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

1 of the Commentary on Article 9).” (Emphasis supplied) iv. He further submitted that the OECD in its 2010 report on profit attribution to the permanent establishment has observed that: “52. This language has its origins in the draft convention adopted by the League of Nations in 1933 and is acknowledged as the statement of the arm‘s length principle

M/S. LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), NOIDA

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

1 of the Commentary on Article 9).” (Emphasis supplied) iv. He further submitted that the OECD in its 2010 report on profit attribution to the permanent establishment has observed that: “52. This language has its origins in the draft convention adopted by the League of Nations in 1933 and is acknowledged as the statement of the arm‘s length principle

LG ELECTRONICS INC., KOREA (LGEK),NOIDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , NEW DELHI

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

1 of the Commentary on Article 9).” (Emphasis supplied) iv. He further submitted that the OECD in its 2010 report on profit attribution to the permanent establishment has observed that: “52. This language has its origins in the draft convention adopted by the League of Nations in 1933 and is acknowledged as the statement of the arm‘s length principle

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5945/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

SATISH DEV JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5955/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4723/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

SAJAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5949/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5947/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions