Search: reassessment u/s 147 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

228 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 143clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,469 Delhi3,013 Chennai852 Kolkata814 Bangalore784 Jaipur708 Ahmedabad668 Hyderabad422 Pune394 Chandigarh287 Surat255 Indore228 Raipur214 Rajkot189 Visakhapatnam185 Amritsar179 Cochin147 Guwahati107 Patna97 Lucknow85 Nagpur78 Cuttack78 Agra72 Dehradun53 Allahabad46 Jodhpur44 Telangana40 Karnataka34 Ranchi22 Jabalpur21 Panaji21 Calcutta15 Kerala7 SC6 Orissa6 Varanasi5 Gauhati2 Punjab & Haryana2 Rajasthan2 Himachal Pradesh2 Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)141 Section 147129 Section 14897 Section 26376 Addition to Income59 Reassessment46 Section 143(2)39 Section 1131 Reopening of Assessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. SHRI RITESH JAIN, INDORE

ITA 794/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

reassessment framed by the AO u/s 147 r.w. section 143(3) without a valid notice u/s 143(2) is not valid

THE DCIT ,CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL vs. M/S VATIKA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 358/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Showing 1–20 of 228 · Page 1 of 12

...

28

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit (Central)-I, M/S. Vatika Builders & Bhopal Developers, Vatika Parisar, बनाम/ Near Petrol Pump, Vs. Lalghati, Bhopal

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

section 292BB cannot cure complete absence of notice. (b) Harman Singh Dhingra Vs. ACIT, New Delhi (2021) 132 taxmann.com 40 (Delhi – ITAT), order dated 24.09.2021: Held: “5…..The Ld. AR further submitted that the reassessment u/s 147 will be invalid, if no notice u/s 143

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

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

section 147 was illegal, void and without jurisdiction. 1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the notice dated 30.03.2019 issued u/s 148 for assessment year 2012-13 by the ld. AO was illegal, bad in law & without jurisdiction since there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts necessary

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

ITA 372/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

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

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

143(3) of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the respective assessment years then the reopening of the reassessment is hit by the proviso to Section 147

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

ITA 373/IND/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

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

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

143(3) of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the respective assessment years then the reopening of the reassessment is hit by the proviso to Section 147

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

ITA 370/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

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

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

143(3) of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the respective assessment years then the reopening of the reassessment is hit by the proviso to Section 147

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

ITA 374/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

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

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

143(3) of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the respective assessment years then the reopening of the reassessment is hit by the proviso to Section 147

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

ITA 371/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

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

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

143(3) of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act were issued after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the respective assessment years then the reopening of the reassessment is hit by the proviso to Section 147

SMT. MEHA JAIN,JALGAON vs. DCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 996/IND/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanismt. Meha Jain Dcit(Central) 40, Jay Nagar, Jilha Peth Bhopal Vs. Jalgaon Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aeipj 3170 N Assessee By Shri P.D. Nagar, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.05.2023

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

section 153A(1) of the Act and consequently the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 19.02.2014 is invalid and liable to be quashed. He has referred to the notice issued u/s 148 on 22.03.3013 and submitted that thereafter a search and seizure action u/s 132(1) was carried on 16.05.2013 when the reassessment

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

section 263 against the reassessment order dated 03.03.2016, on the issue of loan transactions found recorded in the seized material but were not considered and added by the Ld. AO while passing the reassessment order. The Ld. Pr. CIT then pass a revision order u/s 263 on 15.03.2017 by holding that the order passed by the Ld. AO u/s 147

THE ITO-2(2), BHOPAL vs. SHRI SANDEEP KUMAR DUBEY, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed on both

ITA 391/IND/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

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

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassess the income of the assessee u/s 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act. The basic requirement of section

JAYANTILAL SANGHVI,INDORE vs. ACIT 4(1), INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 539/IND/2023[A.Y. 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Jayantilal Sanghvi, Acit, 8/10, Warehouse Road, 4(1), बनाम/ Patel Bridge, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Agtps5825Q Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, C.A. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement .06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

reassessment order dated 13-12- 2016 passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, there is a reference to the fact that previously section 143(3) assessment order had been framed on 24-12-2011. (iii) Lastly and more importantly, the reopening was triggered, based on a statement made by one Mr Sanjeeva Kumar Sinha, Director

ACIT(CENTRAL)-1, INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI RAUNAK MARU, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 27/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

143(3) r.w.s. 153A.It is a settled legal proposition than when the LD. AO had applied his mind and passed the original assessment order and there is no fresh material for initiating the reassessment proceedings, the proceedings so initiated amounts to change of opinion on the same set of facts and such 23 Shri Rajul Bhargava, Indore & otr. proceedings

ACIT(CENTRAL)-1,, INDORE vs. SHRI RAJUL BHARGAVA, INDORE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 26/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

143(3) r.w.s. 153A.It is a settled legal proposition than when the LD. AO had applied his mind and passed the original assessment order and there is no fresh material for initiating the reassessment proceedings, the proceedings so initiated amounts to change of opinion on the same set of facts and such 23 Shri Rajul Bhargava, Indore & otr. proceedings

SUNAYANA INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD,INDORE vs. PCIT-1, INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 218/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisunayana Investment Company Pcit-1, Ltd, Indore Part-B Of 417 Chetak Centre Annex, Vs. R.N.T. Marg, Near Hotel Shreemaya, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaucs5765M Assessee By Shri Sohit Gupta & Ms. Alifiya Ali, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11.10.2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

reassessment order was passed on 27.03.2023 placed at page No. 194 to 205 of the paper book, whereby the A.O has made an addition of Rs.5,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act in the name of the assessee but under different PAN. Therefore, the said issue was not at all subject matter of the order