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.

154 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 2(22)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,647Delhi1,432Chennai563Bangalore561Ahmedabad369Jaipur286Kolkata285Hyderabad280Chandigarh161Indore154Surat145Pune124Visakhapatnam123Rajkot113Raipur98Lucknow62Amritsar55Guwahati54Cuttack53Nagpur48Patna40Cochin37Agra35Telangana29Jodhpur26Dehradun22Allahabad21Karnataka20SC5Orissa4Ranchi4Panaji3Gauhati2Jabalpur2Kerala2Uttarakhand1Varanasi1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 147147Section 143(3)134Section 148100Section 26363Addition to Income55Section 8051Section 80I42Reassessment40Section 143(2)

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

e) The revision order u/s 263 was passed on 15.03.2017. (f) The Ld. AO passed order u/s 143 r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 31st July 2017 (g) Second revision order u/s 263 was passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT on 24.02.2021 which is impugned order. 6. In the first revision order passed u/s

Showing 1–20 of 154 · Page 1 of 8

...
35
Disallowance33
Reopening of Assessment31
Section 1130

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

E R Per Bench: These appeals by the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are directed against the order dated 02.07.2018 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-II, Indore arising from reassessment for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. In the cross objection the assesse has raised legal grounds challenging the validity of the order passed by the AO u/s 147

M/S M.P. MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 422/IND/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

2(15) and therefore, the assesse is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The AO reopened the assessment for A.Y.2011-12 & 2013-14 based on the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2014-15. In the reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147 the AO disallowed the benefit of section 11 & 12 and assessed the income

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 425/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

2(15) and therefore, the assesse is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The AO reopened the assessment for A.Y.2011-12 & 2013-14 based on the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2014-15. In the reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147 the AO disallowed the benefit of section 11 & 12 and assessed the income

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 423/IND/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

2(15) and therefore, the assesse is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The AO reopened the assessment for A.Y.2011-12 & 2013-14 based on the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2014-15. In the reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147 the AO disallowed the benefit of section 11 & 12 and assessed the income

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 427/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

2(15) and therefore, the assesse is not entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The AO reopened the assessment for A.Y.2011-12 & 2013-14 based on the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2014-15. In the reassessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w. section 147 the AO disallowed the benefit of section 11 & 12 and assessed the income

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

E R PER SHRI C.M. GARG, JM This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the learned CIT(A)-I, Bhopal, dated 30.3.2015 in First Appeal No.CIT(A)/BPL/IT-268/13-14 for the assessment year 2005-06. ITO vs. Sandeep Kumar Dubey 2. The only ground raised by the Revenue–appellant reads as follows :- “On the facts

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

e) Further the order sheet also explicitly states that the assessee/AR continuously filed all the details regarding deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11A) to which the Ld. AO was satisfied and the books of accounts were produced before him. Further order sheet dated 06/12/2014 specifically states that AR of the assessee attended the office and submitted written submission in claim

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

e) Further the order sheet also explicitly states that the assessee/AR continuously filed all the details regarding deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11A) to which the Ld. AO was satisfied and the books of accounts were produced before him. Further order sheet dated 06/12/2014 specifically states that AR of the assessee attended the office and submitted written submission in claim

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

e) Further the order sheet also explicitly states that the assessee/AR continuously filed all the details regarding deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11A) to which the Ld. AO was satisfied and the books of accounts were produced before him. Further order sheet dated 06/12/2014 specifically states that AR of the assessee attended the office and submitted written submission in claim

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

e) Further the order sheet also explicitly states that the assessee/AR continuously filed all the details regarding deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11A) to which the Ld. AO was satisfied and the books of accounts were produced before him. Further order sheet dated 06/12/2014 specifically states that AR of the assessee attended the office and submitted written submission in claim

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

e) Further the order sheet also explicitly states that the assessee/AR continuously filed all the details regarding deduction claimed u/s 80IB(11A) to which the Ld. AO was satisfied and the books of accounts were produced before him. Further order sheet dated 06/12/2014 specifically states that AR of the assessee attended the office and submitted written submission in claim

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

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

22,361/-chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of assessee firm for the A.Y. 2013-14. In this case, a return of income was filed for the year under consideration and regular assessment u/s 143(3) was made on 13/11/2014. In this case more than

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 692/IND/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 220(2)

E-1) [2015] 63 taxmann.com 297 (Hyderabad Tribunal.). 9. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the facts of the present case and the case-laws relied upon by the parties. We find that assessee’s activities have not been changed at all since the date of its inception and the assessee was fully eligible for exemption u/s

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 280/IND/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 220(2)

E-1) [2015] 63 taxmann.com 297 (Hyderabad Tribunal.). 9. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the facts of the present case and the case-laws relied upon by the parties. We find that assessee’s activities have not been changed at all since the date of its inception and the assessee was fully eligible for exemption u/s