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.

159 results for “reassessment”+ Section 17(2)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,562Mumbai1,840Chennai699Bangalore680Jaipur487Hyderabad385Kolkata371Ahmedabad367Chandigarh245Pune207Raipur172Amritsar166Surat163Indore159Rajkot145Visakhapatnam139Nagpur84Cuttack78Cochin78Karnataka76Patna74Guwahati67Lucknow62Telangana61Agra45Dehradun43Allahabad35Ranchi33SC30Jodhpur28Calcutta10Orissa7Rajasthan6Kerala5Panaji5Gauhati3Varanasi3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Himachal Pradesh2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Uttarakhand1Jabalpur1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 147122Section 143(3)101Section 14881Addition to Income61Section 26359Section 8048Section 153A44Section 80I40Section 143(2)30Limitation/Time-bar

DILIP BUILDCON LTD ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

ITA 163/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Acit Central-1 Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent /Revenue) Pan: Aaccd 6124 B Assessee By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Shri Yash Kukreja, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 32A

17 of 25 Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Assessment year 2018-19 2. Thermal Power Plant 40102 or 40103 (coal/oil based) 25.8. It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the schedules in the above decision had also considered the ‘list of article or things’ as per the various schedules. Similarly, the above schedules as reproduced above

Showing 1–20 of 159 · Page 1 of 8

...
28
Reassessment27
Disallowance26

AGROH INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS P LTD,MHOW vs. PR CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 95/IND/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Agroh Infrastructure Pr. Cit (Central) Developers Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Aqua Point, A.B.Road, Vs. Umaria, Mhow, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaeca 2752 L Assessee By Shri Manish Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, even as it is under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, proceedings for reassessment can be initiated when what is assessable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. The power to deal with underassessment and the scope of reassessment proceedings as explained by the Supreme Court in the case

SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SINHA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

ITA 428/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 17(2)(iii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 69

17(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 7. That the ld CIT(A) erred in not directing A.O to consider provisions of 234B (3) before calculating interest u/s 234B. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal. Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 Assessment

SMT ANJANA SINHA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

ITA 429/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 17(2)(iii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 69

17(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 7. That the ld CIT(A) erred in not directing A.O to consider provisions of 234B (3) before calculating interest u/s 234B. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal. Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 Assessment

SMT. MANJU SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

ITA 427/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 17(2)(iii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 69

17(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 7. That the ld CIT(A) erred in not directing A.O to consider provisions of 234B (3) before calculating interest u/s 234B. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal. Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 Assessment

SHRI RAJEEV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee are disposed off as

ITA 430/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 153ASection 17(2)(iii)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 69

17(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. 7. That the ld CIT(A) erred in not directing A.O to consider provisions of 234B (3) before calculating interest u/s 234B. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal. Sanjay Kumar Sinha,Anjana Sinha, Rajiv Sharma & Manju Sharma IT(SS)No.150 to 170/Ind/2017 Assessment

SMT. SHARDA,HARSUD, KHANDWA vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 263/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

reassessment proceedings so as to substantiate the amount claimed as exempt on account of proceeds realized from sale of the said rural agricultural land in his income-tax return for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 4.3 He has pointed out that the assessee is not challenging the distance of the said agricultural land from Harda as computed

SHRI PREMNARAYAN,HARSUD, KHANDWA vs. THE PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeals of the assesse in ITANo

ITA 262/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Premnarayan Pcit (1) 31, Somgaon Khurd, Aaykar Bhawan Harsud, Vs. Indore Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Cjzpp1164J Smt. Sharda Pcit (1) A/45, Naya Harsud, Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Khandwa Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Fdxps2997P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2024

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263Section 54B

reassessment proceedings so as to substantiate the amount claimed as exempt on account of proceeds realized from sale of the said rural agricultural land in his income-tax return for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 4.3 He has pointed out that the assessee is not challenging the distance of the said agricultural land from Harda as computed

SHRI NARAYAN DAS TOLANI,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed

ITA 834/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C. M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 133ASection 142ASection 143(3)Section 150(1)

iii) Abdul Wahid Gehlot vs. ITO, (2005) 93 TTJ 0232 (Jodhpur Trib.) (iv) Kishan Chand Harish Chand vs. ACIT, I.T.A.No. 255/JP/1996. 10. The ld. AR further relied on the judgment of Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Computer Science Corporation India (P) Limited vs. Addl. CIT & Ors, (2014) 99 DTR (MP) 383. The ld. AR stated that

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 489/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -5(1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT. LTD., BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 508/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5 1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 510/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

MS MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD,BHOPAL vs. ACIT 2 (1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 486/IND/2024[2012-13 ]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD ,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT -2- (1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 444/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 5(1), BHOPAL , BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH vs. MAPAEX REMEDIES PVT LTD, BHOPAL MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 509/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

iii) that there was a clear-cut disclosure in the audited Balance-Sheet qua the nature, activity and facts of assessee’s business and the audited Balance-Sheet was very much available with and scrutinised by AO during regular assessment. Thus, there was adequate disclosure during regular assessment. (This point shall be meticulously discussed in subsequent para also). Page

DB POWER LTD,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 68/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Db Power Limited, Acit, Central Circle-1, बनाम/ Office Block, 1A, Bhopal Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Acit, Central Circle-1, M/S Db Power Limited, बनाम/ Bhopal Office Block, 1A, Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)(viib)Section 69C

iii). (c) Now, both sides are aggrieved by order of CIT(A) and accordingly come in these cross-appeals on their respective claims. We proceed to dispose of both matters by this common order starting first with assessee’s appeal. Assessee’s appeal: 3. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1(a). That

THE ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. DB POWER LTD, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 73/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Db Power Limited, Acit, Central Circle-1, बनाम/ Office Block, 1A, Bhopal Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Acit, Central Circle-1, M/S Db Power Limited, बनाम/ Bhopal Office Block, 1A, Vs. Db City Park, 5Th Floor, Corporate Block, Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone-1, Arera Hills, Bhopal (Pan:Aaccd5475F) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)(viib)Section 69C

iii). (c) Now, both sides are aggrieved by order of CIT(A) and accordingly come in these cross-appeals on their respective claims. We proceed to dispose of both matters by this common order starting first with assessee’s appeal. Assessee’s appeal: 3. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1(a). That

M/S RADHISHWARI DEVLOPERS P LTD,INDORE vs. PR CIT -2 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

ITA 493/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jul 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

reassessment by invoking the provisions of section 263 may kindly be dropped. Without prejudice to the above as far as merit of the issues reaised in show-cause notice in question are concerned, we have to submit that the learned Assessing Officer has issued notices u/s 133(6) in loan creditor companies (supra). That after getting the requisite details

M/S SHREE COAL ENTERPRISES (I) PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

ITA 1337/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment cannot be declared as invalid in the penalty proceedings.” In the light of the above judgment we are unable to affirm the action of the authorities below. As the initiation of penalty under section 271(1)(c) vide notice 274 of the Act is not inconformity with the requirement of the law. Thus, the Penalty order

M/S KETI SANGAM INFRASTRUCTURE (I) LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

ITA 1341/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment cannot be declared as invalid in the penalty proceedings.” In the light of the above judgment we are unable to affirm the action of the authorities below. As the initiation of penalty under section 271(1)(c) vide notice 274 of the Act is not inconformity with the requirement of the law. Thus, the Penalty order