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.

6 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 129clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi337Mumbai198Bangalore134Jaipur92Chennai79Ahmedabad79Raipur44Indore42Pune37Kolkata29Rajkot26Lucknow22Telangana22Cuttack20Guwahati19Jodhpur18Amritsar16Nagpur14Chandigarh14Surat11Visakhapatnam7Hyderabad6Patna6Karnataka5Allahabad4Cochin4Kerala3Agra2Varanasi2Orissa2Panaji1Uttarakhand1SC1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 14A7Condonation of Delay5Section 56(2)(viia)4Section 2633Section 1472Section 143(3)2Section 472Addition to Income2

HIMASAGAR KRISHNA MUTHAPPAGARI,TIRUPATI vs. ITO., WARD-2(3), TIRUPATI

ITA 687/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri M. Uday Teja, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

reassessment vide his order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 22-03-2022. 13. Before proceeding any further, we deem it fit to cull out the provisions of Section 263 of the Act, which reads as under: “263. Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. (1)The [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S CONCORD DRUGS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result appeals of the assessee in all the years under consideration are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1154/HYD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey

u/s 147. For this proposition he submitted following case law: 1. Mahadev Rice & General Mills Vs. ACIT, 579/Chd/2014 2. ACIT Vs. Dhariya Constructions Co., 197 Taxman 202 (SC). c) Further, he submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be made without recording a finding that the 9 I.T.A. No. 1901Hyd/17 and others Concord Drugs Ltd. escapement of income

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S CONCORD DRUGS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result appeals of the assessee in all the years under consideration are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1152/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey

u/s 147. For this proposition he submitted following case law: 1. Mahadev Rice & General Mills Vs. ACIT, 579/Chd/2014 2. ACIT Vs. Dhariya Constructions Co., 197 Taxman 202 (SC). c) Further, he submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be made without recording a finding that the 9 I.T.A. No. 1901Hyd/17 and others Concord Drugs Ltd. escapement of income

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, HYDERABAD vs. M/S CONCORD DRUGS LTD.,, HYDERABAD

In the result appeals of the assessee in all the years under consideration are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1153/HYD/2014[2007]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2019

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey

u/s 147. For this proposition he submitted following case law: 1. Mahadev Rice & General Mills Vs. ACIT, 579/Chd/2014 2. ACIT Vs. Dhariya Constructions Co., 197 Taxman 202 (SC). c) Further, he submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be made without recording a finding that the 9 I.T.A. No. 1901Hyd/17 and others Concord Drugs Ltd. escapement of income

CONCORD DRUGS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result appeals of the assessee in all the years under consideration are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1901/HYD/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey

u/s 147. For this proposition he submitted following case law: 1. Mahadev Rice & General Mills Vs. ACIT, 579/Chd/2014 2. ACIT Vs. Dhariya Constructions Co., 197 Taxman 202 (SC). c) Further, he submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be made without recording a finding that the 9 I.T.A. No. 1901Hyd/17 and others Concord Drugs Ltd. escapement of income

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD vs. VERTEX PROJECTS LLP (FORMERLY M/S VERTEX PROJECTS LTD) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1187/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit,Circle-10(1) Vs. Vertex Projects Llp Room No.515, 5Th Floor, (Formerly M/S.Vertex A-Block, I.T.Towers, Projects Ltd.) A.C.Guards, #156-159, Paigah House Hyderabad. S.P.Road, Next To Pg College. Secunderabad-500 026. Pan : Aanfv0232C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sriram Seshadri, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar,Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Dated 16.03.2018 For The Ay 2014-15, On The Following Grounds :

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar,CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(3)Section 47Section 56Section 56(2)(viia)Section 56(2)(viiia)

129 taxmann.com 87 (SC). 8. Per contra, the ld.AR had submitted that in the Profit and Loss account, the assessee had only debited a total sum of Rs.68,26,342/- as expenses and out of the said amount, the assessee suo motu itself had disallowed the amount of Rs.49,94,540/- and further, had disallowed an amount of Rs.4