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.

48 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 43Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai119Delhi48Raipur31Bangalore22Hyderabad19Kolkata16Chennai12Nagpur11Jaipur9Pune9Cochin8Ahmedabad6Surat6Indore5Lucknow5Jodhpur1Chandigarh1Allahabad1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14762Section 143(3)57Section 14852Section 4448Addition to Income36Disallowance33Section 43B21Reassessment19Section 153C18

M/s JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result the appeal is allowed and

ITA/501/2007HC Delhi20 Apr 2009
For Appellant: Mr R. Santhanam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R.D. Jolly, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 43B

u/s 148.” 8.3 It cannot be disputed and it is not the case of either side that the reasons extracted hereinabove did not precede the issuance of notice under Section 148(1) of the Act. The requirement for recordal of reasons by the Assessing Officer before issuing a notice is provided for under sub-section (2) of Section

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

Section 153A18
Reopening of Assessment17
Section 26313

DCIT, GURUGRAM vs. RAJESH KUMAR, SONEPAT

In the result, cross-appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 82/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Rajesh Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Central Circle-2, Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Gurgaon. Delhi Road Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon. C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Delhi Road,Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Umesh Takkar, Ca & Shri Saurabh Nagpal, Ca Respondent By Shri P N Barnwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-3, Gurgaon Dated 31.10.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Both Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 41(1)Section 43BSection 68

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148.] [Explanation 4.-For the removal of doubts

RAJESH KUMAR,SONEPAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GURGAON

In the result, cross-appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 61/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Rajesh Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Central Circle-2, Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Gurgaon. Delhi Road Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon. C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Delhi Road,Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Umesh Takkar, Ca & Shri Saurabh Nagpal, Ca Respondent By Shri P N Barnwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-3, Gurgaon Dated 31.10.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Both Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 41(1)Section 43BSection 68

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reasons for such issue have not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of section 148.] [Explanation 4.-For the removal of doubts

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD., DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3441/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinsdia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 147oSection 263Section 43Section 43BSection 44A

section 43B. On this count also, the Assessing Officer was not justified for reopening the assessment u/s 147 as there could not be any prima facie “reason to believe” based on any Page 9 of 14 tangible material. Thus, the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals) holding that reassessment

ACIT, CIRCLE- 20(2), NEW DELHI vs. RPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, C.O No. 70/Del/2021 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6300/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

147 read with Section 148 of the Act is bad in law deserves to be quashed as the conditions and procedures prescribed under the statute have not been satisfied and complied with. The Ld. AR taken us to the paper book and submitted that reopening of assessment 6 ITA. 6300/Del/2018 AND C. O. No. 70/Del/2021 M/s. RPS Infrastructure

THE KADIYAN COOP. L&C SOCIETY LTD.,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 667/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishithe Kadiyan Coop L&C Society Vs. Acit, Ltd, Circle Panipat V&Po Sewah, Panipat, Haryana Pan: Aaalt0541R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Aneja, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 155Section 80

u/s 80P(2) VI of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to invoke for mutual interest of employment.” 3. The appellant assessee is a cooperative society, which is primarily having object of promoting the economic interest of manual labourers by providing suitable and profitable employment to them by obtaining contract work from government or private. The assessee filed its return

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4971/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4968/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4972/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4973/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4970/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NOIDA vs. NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE CO. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4969/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings waiving its right to challenge the same before the Constitutional Courts under writ jurisdiction; the objections of the appellant to assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO. had become infructuous & needs to be given quietus. The challenge posed by the appellant to the assumption of jurisdiction by the Id. AO. u/s. 147 of I.T. Act, 1961 is, therefore

MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usi.T.A. No. 672/Del/2018 (A.Y 2008-09)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 43B

147 of the Act without appreciating that the appellant had fully and truly disclosed all material facts. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AOI Ld. CIT(A) erred in completing upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings even though the reasons recorded by the Ld. AO were vague

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2953/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

reassessment proceedings took place. The assessment was passed by the learned assessing officer u/s 143 (3) read with Section 147 of the income tax act on 15th of December 2009 wherein following three additions/disallowances were made. a. Addition on account of the liabilities taken over by the government of India of Rs 1830 crores b. addition on account of reduction

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S IFCI LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2817/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

reassessment proceedings took place. The assessment was passed by the learned assessing officer u/s 143 (3) read with Section 147 of the income tax act on 15th of December 2009 wherein following three additions/disallowances were made. a. Addition on account of the liabilities taken over by the government of India of Rs 1830 crores b. addition on account of reduction

M/S IFCI LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2659/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

reassessment proceedings took place. The assessment was passed by the learned assessing officer u/s 143 (3) read with Section 147 of the income tax act on 15th of December 2009 wherein following three additions/disallowances were made. a. Addition on account of the liabilities taken over by the government of India of Rs 1830 crores b. addition on account of reduction

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S HTL LTD.,, CHENNAI

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3955/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

43B in the return of income before the AO. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that since the above expenditure is allowed as per the Companies Act hence it is not contingent in nature as income is computed as per Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S HTL LTD.,, CHENNAI

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3953/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

43B in the return of income before the AO. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that since the above expenditure is allowed as per the Companies Act hence it is not contingent in nature as income is computed as per Income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25 , NEW DELHI vs. HTL LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 716/DEL/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2000-01

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

43B in the return of income before the AO. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that since the above expenditure is allowed as per the Companies Act hence it is not contingent in nature as income is computed as per Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S HTL LTD.,, CHENNAI

Accordingly, appeal of the ld AO is dismissed

ITA 3957/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 43B

43B in the return of income before the AO. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that since the above expenditure is allowed as per the Companies Act hence it is not contingent in nature as income is computed as per Income