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.

29 results for “reassessment”+ Section 50Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai89Delhi85Jaipur72Ahmedabad52Hyderabad29Kolkata25Surat24Bangalore23Raipur23Chennai19Indore19Pune18Agra17Lucknow17Nagpur13Visakhapatnam13Rajkot10Guwahati10Chandigarh5Dehradun3Jodhpur3Patna3Jabalpur2Cuttack2Amritsar2Panaji1Allahabad1Varanasi1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 14865Section 153C55Section 14749Section 50C33Section 143(3)32Section 26320Addition to Income16Capital Gains12Section 153D10Reassessment

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1680/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

For Respondent: : Shri Sunku Srinivasu, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C

50C of the Act and consequent addition made in the hands of the assessee in assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. 13. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee for the year under consideration had filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 41,85,43,859/-. The assessee had declared long term capital gain

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 144A8
Search & Seizure8
ITA 1678/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: PendingITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

For Respondent: : Shri Sunku Srinivasu, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C

50C of the Act and consequent addition made in the hands of the assessee in assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. 13. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee for the year under consideration had filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 41,85,43,859/-. The assessee had declared long term capital gain

L.RAJALAKSHMI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1679/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

For Respondent: : Shri Sunku Srinivasu, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C

50C of the Act and consequent addition made in the hands of the assessee in assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. 13. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee for the year under consideration had filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 41,85,43,859/-. The assessee had declared long term capital gain

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. L.RAJALAKSHMI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 1138/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Mr. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1678, 1679 & 1680/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. L.Rajalakshmi, Hyderabad अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Afgpr3011K …..

For Respondent: : Shri Sunku Srinivasu, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C

50C of the Act and consequent addition made in the hands of the assessee in assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. 13. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee for the year under consideration had filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 41,85,43,859/-. The assessee had declared long term capital gain

SIVA SHANKER REDDY GANDLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1686/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 50C

50C of the Act is applicable to the assessee's case. 5.3. Further the assessee has submitted that since the agricultural land that was sold by the assessee was not having a proper approach road and the land was surrounded by the lands of the neighbors from all the sides, the land was sold for a price less than

SIVAPOTHULURU VEERAREDDY GADLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1685/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 50C

50C of the Act is applicable to the assessee's case. 5.3. Further the assessee has submitted that since the agricultural land that was sold by the assessee was not having a proper approach road and the land was surrounded by the lands of the neighbors from all the sides, the land was sold for a price less than

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1102/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1101/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1104/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee company in ITA Nos

ITA 1103/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1101, 1102, 1103, 1104 & 1105/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2016-17) Swastik Vegetable Oil Vs. Assistant Commissioner Products Private Limited, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Aadcs2224G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Company Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Dated 19.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Orders Passed By The Ao Under Section 143(3) R.W. Section 153C Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Dated 31.05.2021, For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2016-17. As Certain Common Issues Are Involved In The Present Appeals, Therefore, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Of Vide A Private Limited Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

50C of the Act. We, thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, are of a firm conviction that the nexus between the seized material and the assessee’s land transaction stands established on record. 13. Apart from that, we find that the satisfaction note prepared by the AO of the searched person clearly records that the seized material revealed

VIJAYA LAKSHMI MITTAPALLI,KHAMMAM vs. ITO WARD-1 KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

ITA 232/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar
Section 144ASection 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

reassessments as erroneous ones causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue read as under : ITA Nos.232 to 235/Hyd/2021 4. Learned authorized representative invited our attention to assessees’s detailed Paper Book running into 157 pages containing common sale agreement dt.01.04.2011, sale deed dt.14.11.2013, property valuation report, certificate of market value of the property(ies) on sale agreement as well

RAMESH MITTAPALLI,KHAMMAM vs. ITO WARD-1 KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

ITA 235/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar
Section 144ASection 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

reassessments as erroneous ones causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue read as under : ITA Nos.232 to 235/Hyd/2021 4. Learned authorized representative invited our attention to assessees’s detailed Paper Book running into 157 pages containing common sale agreement dt.01.04.2011, sale deed dt.14.11.2013, property valuation report, certificate of market value of the property(ies) on sale agreement as well

NAVEEN MITTAPALLI,KHAMMAM vs. ITO WARD-1 KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

ITA 233/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar
Section 144ASection 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

reassessments as erroneous ones causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue read as under : ITA Nos.232 to 235/Hyd/2021 4. Learned authorized representative invited our attention to assessees’s detailed Paper Book running into 157 pages containing common sale agreement dt.01.04.2011, sale deed dt.14.11.2013, property valuation report, certificate of market value of the property(ies) on sale agreement as well

MURALI KRISHNA MITTAPALLI,KHAMMAM vs. ITO WARD-1 KHAMMAM, KHAMMAM

ITA 234/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar
Section 144ASection 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

reassessments as erroneous ones causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue read as under : ITA Nos.232 to 235/Hyd/2021 4. Learned authorized representative invited our attention to assessees’s detailed Paper Book running into 157 pages containing common sale agreement dt.01.04.2011, sale deed dt.14.11.2013, property valuation report, certificate of market value of the property(ies) on sale agreement as well

SHIV KUMAR MITTAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 633/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2009-10 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 8(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Acipm 3813 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vikash Modi Revenue By: Smt. V. Aparna Date Of Hearing: 04/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2019 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Of The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 8, Hyderabad, Dated, 16/02/2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Had Sold A Property Situated At Kondapur Grampanchayat, Serilingampally Mandal, Rr District Vide Sale Deed No. 4100/2008 Dated 5Th June, 2008 For A Consideration Of Rs. 15,48,000/-, Whereas The Guideline Value Of The Property As Adopted By The Stamp Valuation Authority Was Rs. 50,56,000/-. Since The Assessee Did Not Offer Any Capital Gains On This Transaction To Tax, Ao Initiated Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 On 24/03/2016, Which Was Served On The Assessee By Way Of Affixture At The Last Known Address & Thereafter Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued On 09/05/2016. Since There Was No Reply From The Assessee, A 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd..

For Appellant: Shri Vikash ModiFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)Section 50C

reassessment proceeding initiated by the AO is not valid. The AO, however, did not accept the assessee’s contentions and observed that proceedings were initiated with the prior approval of the Pr. CIT-II, Hyderabad vide proceedings dated 23/03/2016 and notice dated 24/03/2016 u/s 148 was also issued and served on the assessee by affixture at the last known address

YADI REDDY SANA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-13(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 103/HYD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)

50C(2) of the Act, in view of the objects raised by the Appellant. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in sustaining the action of the Assessing Officer in denying the deductions amounting to Rs.54,79,067 claimed by the Appellant in respect of commission paid while acquiring the property, cost

SWASTIK VEGETABLE OIL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1105/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153D

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous

NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 384/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhassessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 50C

reassessment proceedings, the AO made the addition of Rs.2,71,89,574/- relating to long term capital gains invoking the provisions of section 50C

LATE S.SURESH LEGAL HEIR BY S.MAHESH ,SECUNDRABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 1134/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sri Mohd. AfzalFor Respondent: Smt. Kanika Agarwal,DR
Section 148Section 2(14)Section 282Section 50C

50C and brought the assessee’s share of the sale consideration to tax. 3. Aggrieved, the legal heir of the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (A) stating that the assessee has passed away on 14.12.2015 and the notice u/s 148 dated 8.3.2016 issued on a dead person, was an invalid notice and therefore, the assessment order

SANJAY KUMAR AGARWAL ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1420/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Hari AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Ur Rahman, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 250(6)Section 45Section 50C

reassessment U/s. 147 is bad in law. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that the notice issued by the Learned A.O. U/s. 148 of the Act is invalid and bad in law, since the approval is required to be obtained from one of them i.e, either from PCIT or from CIT but the same