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.

77 results for “reassessment”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,532Mumbai2,060Bangalore760Chennai684Ahmedabad563Jaipur536Kolkata505Raipur376Pune335Hyderabad292Chandigarh223Surat198Indore182Rajkot166Amritsar139Cuttack131Visakhapatnam115Karnataka111Nagpur92Patna91Agra85Guwahati77Lucknow76Telangana68Ranchi66Cochin65Dehradun54Allahabad53Jodhpur44Calcutta23SC17Orissa12Panaji11Varanasi10Jabalpur10Rajasthan7Kerala6Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 153A62Section 143(3)59Addition to Income48Section 153C45Section 6836Section 25034Section 153D30Section 14724Section 14822Natural Justice

INDER CHAND SAND,SILCHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SILCHAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA

ITA 49/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

natural justice, hence the order requires to be cancelled. 5. That the Learned Assessing Officer erred in relying on material/information without furnishing the same to the assessee before passing the assessment order. Page 4 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 49 & 51/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Inderchand Sand & Saroj Devi Sand. 6. That the Authorities erred in relying on sworn statements

SAROJ DEVI SAND,SILCHAR vs. INCOEM TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, SILCHAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA

ITA 51/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 77 · Page 1 of 4

18
Reassessment14
Reopening of Assessment13
ITAT Guwahati
23 Dec 2022
AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

natural justice, hence the order requires to be cancelled. 5. That the Learned Assessing Officer erred in relying on material/information without furnishing the same to the assessee before passing the assessment order. Page 4 of 15 I.T.A. Nos.: 49 & 51/Gty/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Inderchand Sand & Saroj Devi Sand. 6. That the Authorities erred in relying on sworn statements

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

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 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

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - TINSUKIA , TINSUKIA vs. RINU SINGH L/R OF JOY PRAKASH SINGH , TINSUKIA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 432/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Assessment Year:2014-15 Acit, Circle-Tinsukia Vs. Renu Singh The Legal Heir Of Late Jai Prakash Singh Jasoda Talkies Compound, Digboi-786171 Pan/Gir No. : Ahdps9100M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice is offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law. t) The penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings. The proceedings for imposition of penalty though emanate from proceedings

M/S. R.M. SAHA PETROLEUM AGENCY,AGARTALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AGARTALA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 226/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Sainiassessment Year :2014-15

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice is offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law. t) The penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings. The proceedings for imposition of penalty though emanate from proceedings

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 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 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 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 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,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,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