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.

52 results for “reassessment”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,299Mumbai1,152Chennai468Ahmedabad416Raipur345Jaipur345Bangalore302Hyderabad247Kolkata214Pune208Chandigarh171Rajkot151Indore128Surat93Patna87Nagpur76Amritsar71Cuttack68Agra59Visakhapatnam53Ranchi53Guwahati52Lucknow49Jodhpur42Cochin40Allahabad39Dehradun33Panaji9Varanasi4Jabalpur4

Key Topics

Section 153A46Section 25031Addition to Income30Section 143(3)27Section 153D25Section 14820Section 6816Section 10(26)14Reassessment13Natural Justice

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SILCHAR vs. ROHIT KUMAR GULGULIA, SILCHAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 182/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Babu Lal Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri N. T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

reassessment solely on the basis of the purported statement and on the other hand, Ld. AO did not deem it proper or reasonable to confront such purported statement to the assessee. 7.1. To buttress the contention, Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

13
Section 143(2)10
Disallowance9

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. LINKSTAR PROMOTERS (P) LTD, KOLKATA

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

ITA 9/GTY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 68

reassessment proceedings on the ground of change of opinion, ld. CIT(Appeals) also quashed the assessment proceedings for the gross violation of the principle of natural justice

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. WINNER DEALTRADE (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 13/GTY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 68

reassessment proceedings on the ground of change of opinion, ld. CIT(Appeals) also quashed the assessment proceedings for the gross violation of the principle of natural justice

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 222/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the IT Act 1961 was bad in law and hence the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 224/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the IT Act 1961 was bad in law and hence the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

ITA 219/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the IT Act 1961 was bad in law and hence the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT(A) based on the assessment order is bad in law and be quashed

MANOJ ANAND,GUWAHATI vs. ITO W-2(2) GHY, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 273/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Manoj Anand Ito W-2(2), Ghy Flat 4D, Garima Grand, Aaykar Bhawan, Christian Basti, Departmental Representative B. G.S. Road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Baruah Road, Guwahati-781007, Assam Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agbpa9883C

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jha, DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

natural justice as enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timber Industries(Supra). We also note that no adverse material, no cash trail, rotation of funds, or incriminating evidencesrelating to the assessee's transaction was brought on records by the authorities below. We further note that no enquiry has been conducted into the documents/evidences furnished by the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI vs. BMG INFORMATICS PVT. LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 61/GTY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati07 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Pandey, JCIT
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment u/s. 147 of the Act. 2.3. Ld. AO has implicated the assessee for unaccounted cash transactions with DSSPL and made the addition for the same in the hands of the assessee to complete the assessment u/s. 147 read with sec. 143(3) of the Act. In the course of assessment, assessee had provided sample purchase invoices, sample sales invoices

MITCHELL WANKHAR,SHILLONG vs. ITO W-2, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 274/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 271ASection 4Section 44ASection 69A

natural justice was not followed and without going into the merits of the case, the appeal was dismissed merely on limitation. Not a single hearing notice was served on the appellant, hence the appellate order is bad in law and should be quashed. 2. That the reassessment

MITCHELL WANKHAR,SHILLONG vs. ITO W-2, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 275/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 271ASection 4Section 44ASection 69A

natural justice was not followed and without going into the merits of the case, the appeal was dismissed merely on limitation. Not a single hearing notice was served on the appellant, hence the appellate order is bad in law and should be quashed. 2. That the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 37/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 41/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 43/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 38/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

CHUKHU TAJO,ITANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Agarwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray, DR
Section 10(26)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

Natural Justice enshrined in law 3. For that the Leamed CIT(A) erred in upholding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer which was assumed without mandatory service of notice u/s 148. 4. For that the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer was wrong to have completed the reassessment

RAJULHOUBIENUO ANGAMI,NAGALAND vs. ITO WARD 2, DIMAPUR

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: This Hon'Ble Tribunal Assailing The Order Dated 24.06.2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["Ld. Cit(A)"]. That The Due Date For Filing The Appeal Was 24Th August, 2024. However, There Has Been An Unintentional Delay Of 166 Days (Upto 13Th February, 2025), In Filing The Present Appeal, For Which The Appellant, With Utmost Humility, Seeks The Indulgence Of This Hon'Ble Tribunal For Condonation Of The Said Delay On The Grounds Set Forth Herein. 2. It Is Submitted That The Mr. Shivendu Maharaj Is The Accountant Of The Appellant Who Looks After The Tax Portal & Email Updates. The Accountant Also Forwards The Needful To The Chartered Accountant, Mr. Ajit Jain, To Take Necessary Action In Response To Any Notice That Is Received.

Section 10(26)Section 147Section 250Section 69A

natural justice as the same was passed without providing any opportunity of being heard to the Appellant. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the mandatory issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not been complied in the present case. Therefore, the entire re-opening proceedings under section 147 r.w.s

SHRI ABHIJIT RABHA,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-BONGAIGAON, BONGAIGAON

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 163/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 150Section 150(2)Section 250

reassessment etc. under Section 147/148 d. fourthly, providing the reasons so recorded to the Appellant as soon as possible after the issue of the notice under Section 148 of the Act, e. fifthly, disposing the objections, if any filed, by the Appellant to the issue of the notice under Section 148 of the Act and f. finally, after following

SHRI ABHIJIT RABHA,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-BONGAIGAON, BONGAIGAON

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 162/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 150Section 150(2)Section 250

reassessment etc. under Section 147/148 d. fourthly, providing the reasons so recorded to the Appellant as soon as possible after the issue of the notice under Section 148 of the Act, e. fifthly, disposing the objections, if any filed, by the Appellant to the issue of the notice under Section 148 of the Act and f. finally, after following