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.

39 results for “reassessment”+ Section 144clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,233Mumbai1,083Chennai385Jaipur348Ahmedabad345Bangalore327Kolkata258Hyderabad237Pune164Raipur146Surat129Rajkot127Indore121Chandigarh115Amritsar109Visakhapatnam93Patna83Agra67Cuttack63Nagpur59Lucknow54Cochin52Guwahati39Jodhpur36Allahabad30Dehradun28Telangana25Panaji20Karnataka17SC16Ranchi11Jabalpur9Varanasi8Orissa3Calcutta3Rajasthan2Uttarakhand1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 14855Section 25043Section 6840Section 153A37Addition to Income35Section 153D31Section 10(26)28Section 143(2)23Reassessment20Section 147

MAYURPLY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.,HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 224/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati24 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kaushik Roy, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 253Section 253(5)

144(3) dated 30.12.2019. 05. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A), after discussing the assessment order, came to the conclusion that the addition was rightly made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of unexplained share capital/ share premium when assessee or authorized representative failed to attend the appellate proceedings on behalf of the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

19
Exemption11
Penalty9

KARISHMA JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 308/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144

KARAN JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 310/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144

RESHMI JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 306/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144

KARISHMA JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 309/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144

RESHMI JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 307/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner] under sub-section (12) of Section 144

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

reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were finalised on 29.03.2022, after making an addition of Rs. 77,99,220/- under Section 69A of the Act. Admittedly, the assessee belongs to Naga Tribes covered under the provision of section 10(26) of the Act. A reading of the Ld. AO's order reveals that neither was any return

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI vs. FORTUNE VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross objections of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 21/GTY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

144 of the Income-tax Act was altogether without jurisdiction because such assessment was made for all the five years on the basis of survey conducted under section 133A of the Income-tax Act. He submitted that the power under section 153C read with section 153A cannot be exercised on the basis of any discovery made during survey under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. PAWAN CEMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY

ITA 72/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

reassessment is that there is no need to resort to Section 147 of the I. T. Act and to consider the disallowance in the assessment to be made under section 153 of the I.T. Act? 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in misinterpreting the CBDT's Circular

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. PAWAN CEMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for AY

ITA 73/GTY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

reassessment is that there is no need to resort to Section 147 of the I. T. Act and to consider the disallowance in the assessment to be made under section 153 of the I.T. Act? 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in misinterpreting the CBDT's Circular

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

144 of the Act and similarly, the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 20.12.2018 is also ex-parte though the issue is discussed on merit in details. As regards AY 2014-15 is concerned both the lower authorities have decided the issues on merits and ld. CIT(A) has Page 4 of 12 I.T.A. Nos.: 162 & 163/GTY/2019 Assessment Years

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

144 of the Act and similarly, the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 20.12.2018 is also ex-parte though the issue is discussed on merit in details. As regards AY 2014-15 is concerned both the lower authorities have decided the issues on merits and ld. CIT(A) has Page 4 of 12 I.T.A. Nos.: 162 & 163/GTY/2019 Assessment Years

M/S. BALAJI ENTERPRISE,GUWAHATI vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 354/GTY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 124Section 124(1)Section 124(3)(b)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 3

144 to show cause why the assessment should not be completed to the best of the judgment of the Assessing Officer, whichever is earlier. (c) where an action has been taken under section 132 or section 132A, after the expiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under sub-section (1) of section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA , AGARTALA vs. SHRI SUBHAJIT PAUL, AGARTALA

In the result, cross-objection nos

ITA 116/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.116/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rockein Saikia, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153D

section & served upon the assessee. 4. Sentence regarding approval u/s. 153D is to be mentioned in “note not for the assessee”. 5. Return income must be mentioned in the body of the order

SHRI PRABAL ROY CHOUDHURY,SILCHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SILCHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 250Section 263

144 of the Income Tax Act. This was an ex-parte assessment order according to the best judgment of the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer has determined the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.18,96,150/-. 3. The ld. Commissioner took cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act on the ground that assessment order

LALTANPUIA CHAWGHLUT,AIZAWL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SILCHAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 191/GTY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: The Itat Dated 15.09.2025 As Under:

For Respondent: Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT
Section 10(26)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reassessment as per the provision of section 147 to 151 of the Act, the notice was issued u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021 and time was granted to file return of income for 30 days but assessee did not file return of income. Subsequently, other statutory notices u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee

LALTANPUIA CHAWGHLUT,AIZAWL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 190/GTY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: The Itat Dated 15.09.2025 As Under:

For Respondent: Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT
Section 10(26)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reassessment as per the provision of section 147 to 151 of the Act, the notice was issued u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021 and time was granted to file return of income for 30 days but assessee did not file return of income. Subsequently, other statutory notices u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee

TOSHEVI KEDITSU SEMA,KOHIMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

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

ITA 241/GTY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 149Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings is liable to be quashed. 2. For that the Ld. Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act and making addition of Rs. 1,68,71,990.00 in as much as the income of the appellant is exempt u/s 10(26) of the Act. 3. For that the Ld. Assessing Officer

TOSHEVI KEDITSU SEMA,KOHIMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

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

ITA 242/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 149Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings is liable to be quashed. 2. For that the Ld. Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act and making addition of Rs. 1,68,71,990.00 in as much as the income of the appellant is exempt u/s 10(26) of the Act. 3. For that the Ld. Assessing Officer

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ARIHANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , GUWAHATI

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

ITA 275/GTY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 43(5)Section 73

144 of the Act and loss from trading of F & O (Derivatives) of Rs. 4,08,99,275/- was disallowed and income assessed at Rs. 5,71,17,516/- in the re-assessment order dated 23.11.2015. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) raising legal grounds as well as grounds on merit and finally succeeded