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.

2 results for “reassessment”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,731Mumbai3,702Chennai1,128Bangalore933Kolkata871Ahmedabad725Jaipur561Hyderabad521Pune380Chandigarh297Rajkot218Indore200Raipur197Surat187Visakhapatnam149Amritsar143Patna108Lucknow105Nagpur105Cochin104Guwahati89Agra87Ranchi70Cuttack61Dehradun51Jodhpur48Allahabad37Karnataka28Panaji27SC26Calcutta22Jabalpur12Orissa11Telangana11Kerala9Varanasi9Rajasthan7Punjab & Haryana6Himachal Pradesh2Gauhati1Madhya Pradesh1Uttarakhand1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Section 1482Section 12A2Exemption2Addition to Income2

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/29/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with
Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

Section 148 of the Act (issued by the Assessing Officer stating that the earmarked funds shown in the Funds Pending Utilization are to be treated as income of the assessee on the same set of facts and material which were in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer), is invalid. The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer cannot issue notice

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/31/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with
Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

Section 148 of the Act (issued by the Assessing Officer stating that the earmarked funds shown in the Funds Pending Utilization are to be treated as income of the assessee on the same set of facts and material which were in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer), is invalid. The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer cannot issue notice