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.

59 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Unexplained Moneyclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi896Mumbai872Ahmedabad352Jaipur323Kolkata246Chennai246Bangalore221Hyderabad181Chandigarh131Pune128Rajkot110Indore82Visakhapatnam70Surat63Guwahati59Raipur42Nagpur37Agra33Patna32Amritsar31Lucknow30Cochin27Jodhpur19Allahabad17Cuttack12Varanasi3Dehradun3Orissa2Panaji2Telangana2SC1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)42Addition to Income41Section 6833Section 153A30Section 14827Section 14726Section 25022Reopening of Assessment14Section 143(2)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati03 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153C

money 8 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 & Assessment Year: 2013-2014 ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Limited transferred to M/s Silverpoint Infratech Ltd. came back to the concerns of the clients .Again on 06/09/2016, Shri Sanjay Kumar Drolia stated in his deposition before the department that through entities controlled and managed by him and others, including M/s. Silverpoint Infratech Ltd, he had provided

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

13
Section 69A11
Deduction11
Disallowance10

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 40/GTY/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati03 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: (1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153C

money 8 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 & Assessment Year: 2013-2014 ABCI Infrastructure Pvt. Limited transferred to M/s Silverpoint Infratech Ltd. came back to the concerns of the clients .Again on 06/09/2016, Shri Sanjay Kumar Drolia stated in his deposition before the department that through entities controlled and managed by him and others, including M/s. Silverpoint Infratech Ltd, he had provided

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

147 of the Act in relation to the same sale proceeds received in the bank account. And pursuant to the re-opening, in the reassessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) dated 24-12-2018, the AO’s predecessor had recorded a categorical finding that the receipts pertained to sale of investments which had been verified by him. There

LAKSHMI NARAYAN COAL AND MINES LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), GUWAHATI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 174/GTY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

unexplained cash credit had been introduced in your books of accounts in the name of introduction of share capital and receipt of share application money. In absence of satisfactory identity and credit worthiness of the other parties. the entire introduced capital and share application money will be treated as your income for that year. I will therefore continue the proceedings

RI-BHOI ISPAT & ROLLING MILLS,BYRNIHAT vs. ITO, WARD- BYRNIHAT, BYRNIHAT

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

ITA 241/GTY/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 69C

unexplained expenditure under Sec.69C of the IT Act, 1961. Hence, this case has been misplaced by the Ld. CIT(A) and this citation of the Apex court is distinguishable in the preset case in hand. The Ld. CIT(A) has not gone through the facts of the case thoroughly and uphold the decision of the Ld. AO is not sustainable

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

147 of the I. T,. Act could not be made u/s. 153A of the I. T. Act? While disposing appeal the Hon'ble High Court held: We are in agreement with the views expressed by the Karnataka High Court that incriminating material is a pre-requisite before power could have been exercised under section 153C read with section 153A

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

147 of the I. T,. Act could not be made u/s. 153A of the I. T. Act? While disposing appeal the Hon'ble High Court held: We are in agreement with the views expressed by the Karnataka High Court that incriminating material is a pre-requisite before power could have been exercised under section 153C read with section 153A

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 95/GTY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 96/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 94/GTY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

JUD CEMENT LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE - SHILLONG , SHILLONG

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 39/GTY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 76/GTY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED,NAHARLAGUN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 93/GTY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 77/GTY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 69/GTY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SMS SMELTERS LIMITED, NAHARLAGUN

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 91/GTY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

JUD CEMENT LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE - SHILLONG , SHILLONG

Appeals are allowed in view of our foregoing detailed discussions

ITA 40/GTY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 80l

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. According to the appellant in the reasons recorded for re-opening of its case, the only reason given is that the appellant company received transport subsidy amounting to Rs.6,97,84,511/- for the period from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2016 which according to the assessing officer escaped the assessment. No other reason was recorded

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND vs. IMKUMMONGLA PONGEN, SHILLONG

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

ITA 156/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Act since the notice was never served upon the assessee personally. It is stated that the assessee is from the Scheduled Tribe of Nagaland and is exempt from Income Tax as per section 10(26) of the Act. The assessee is an agriculturist having paddy field and timber plantation in Longsa village under Mokokchung

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