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.

7 results for “reassessment”+ Section 271Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai32Rajkot21Delhi21Pune15Ahmedabad15Jaipur14Amritsar10Nagpur9Surat8Hyderabad7Patna6Raipur5Indore5Cuttack4Bangalore3Lucknow3Chandigarh3Chennai2Guwahati2Jabalpur2Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 14821Section 133A6Penalty6Section 1475Section 1395Section 115Section 148A4Section 69A4Section 271F4Addition to Income

RAMESH BABU BEJJALA,KOTHAGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOTHAGUDEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1010/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 348Section 44ASection 63A

reassessment order are vitiated in lew. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 30,17,000/- made under Section 63A of the Act by the Assessing Officer without any independent verification or reconciliation. The authorities failed to refute the explanations provided with cogent evidence rendering the addition unsustainable. 4. The learned CIT(A) failed

4
Cash Deposit3
Reassessment3

COGNIZANCE CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 344/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: CA Srinivas MadduryFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271ASection 271FSection 69A

sections": [ "139", "147", "148", "142(1)", "144", "69A", "234A", "234B", "271A", "271(1)(c)", "271(1)(b)", "271F", "292BB", "148A(b)", "144B(6)(ii)(a)", "147/144", "144B(6)(7)(a)" ], "issues": "Whether the notice issued u/s 148 was validly served on the assessee, and if not, whether the reassessment

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATI RAJ, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and cross- objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1211/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 124(3)Section 139Section 148

271F. Similarly, in case of failure to file return by charitable society under section 139(4A) penalty has been prescribed under section 272A(2)(e). On a plain reading of the relevant provisions, failure to file the return under section 139(4A) cannot be interpreted to mean that income cannot to be computed in the case of a charitable trust

DANDEBOINA RAMESH,WARANGAL vs. ITO, WARD-(1), WARANGAL

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

ITA 1661/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
Section 115Section 139Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69A

271F of the I.T. Act, 1961.\n10. Any other ground or grounds your appellant may urge at the time of hearing.\"\nThe brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who had not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") for the year under consideration. Based

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1642/HYD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

271F were initiated. Subsequently, the assessee filed a letter stating that the revised return filed on 30.12.2005 be considered as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148. It was further submitted that due to heavy losses the Hyderabad operations were abandoned and there was no staff, and the assessee is unable to collect the papers relevant for the year

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1643/HYD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

271F were initiated. Subsequently, the assessee filed a letter stating that the revised return filed on 30.12.2005 be considered as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148. It was further submitted that due to heavy losses the Hyderabad operations were abandoned and there was no staff, and the assessee is unable to collect the papers relevant for the year

M/S ANURADHA PROPERTIES & TOWNSHIPS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1,, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1644/HYD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Gowtham, Sr.AR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271F

271F were initiated. Subsequently, the assessee filed a letter stating that the revised return filed on 30.12.2005 be considered as return filed in response to notice u/s. 148. It was further submitted that due to heavy losses the Hyderabad operations were abandoned and there was no staff, and the assessee is unable to collect the papers relevant for the year