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.

5 results for “reassessment”+ Section 201clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi223Mumbai155Chennai134Bangalore88Jaipur81Ahmedabad69Kolkata29Rajkot28Raipur24Pune20Hyderabad19Jodhpur17Chandigarh15Amritsar15Patna12Visakhapatnam10Guwahati5Surat5Indore4Cuttack4Cochin3Nagpur3Lucknow3Allahabad2Panaji1Ranchi1Agra1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)9Section 271A4Section 1474Section 143(2)4Section 1424Addition to Income3Section 69A2Section 69C2Section 153(1)2Cash Deposit

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)

201/ [2022] 447 ITR 517 has taken a contrary view. 7.1 In the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the Delhi High Court, while considering the very issue and on interpretation of section 153A of the Act, 1961, has summarised the legal position as under: Summary of the legal position 38. On a conspectus of section 153A

2
Penalty2
Reassessment2

SHRI BIMAL PAUL,SILCHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SILCHAR

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

ITA 211/GTY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)

201 ITR 839, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held that Circulars, being purely administrative in nature, cannot bind the appellate authorities in the matter of interpretation of the provisions of the Act. Bimal Paul, AYs: 2010-11 & 2011-12 4.10 Without prejudice, the matter can be considered from a different perspective also. The same paragraph of the Manual

SHRI BIMAL PAUL,SILCHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SILCHAR

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

ITA 8/GTY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)

201 ITR 839, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held that Circulars, being purely administrative in nature, cannot bind the appellate authorities in the matter of interpretation of the provisions of the Act. Bimal Paul, AYs: 2010-11 & 2011-12 4.10 Without prejudice, the matter can be considered from a different perspective also. The same paragraph of the Manual

SUMAIYA ENTERPRISE,BARPETA vs. ITO, WARD - BARPETA ROAD, BARPETA

ITA 201/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Assessing Officer, Nor Any Return Of Income Was Filed. Thereafter, The Ld. Assessing Officer Proceeded To Add Rs. 1,15,71,000/- Under Section 69A & 69C Of The Act.

Section 147Section 271ASection 69ASection 69C

201 & 202/GTY/2024 Sumaiya Enterprise (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”], dated 29.02.2024. This order itself is on the order passed under Section 147/144 of the Act, dated 29.02.2024, passed by the Ld. AO, in an exparte manner. It is seen that the assessee had made a number of cash deposits and withdrawals on account of which his case

SUMAIYA ENTERPRISE,BARPETA vs. ITO, WARD - BARPETA ROAD, BARPETA

ITA 202/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Assessing Officer, Nor Any Return Of Income Was Filed. Thereafter, The Ld. Assessing Officer Proceeded To Add Rs. 1,15,71,000/- Under Section 69A & 69C Of The Act.

Section 147Section 271ASection 69ASection 69C

201 & 202/GTY/2024 Sumaiya Enterprise (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”], dated 29.02.2024. This order itself is on the order passed under Section 147/144 of the Act, dated 29.02.2024, passed by the Ld. AO, in an exparte manner. It is seen that the assessee had made a number of cash deposits and withdrawals on account of which his case