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.

10 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 54Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi48Jaipur26Mumbai23Chennai22Bangalore21Hyderabad19Ahmedabad10Pune10Indore10Kolkata9Raipur8Patna8Agra6Chandigarh6Visakhapatnam5Lucknow4Jodhpur4Karnataka2Surat2Amritsar1Allahabad1Nagpur1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 14729Section 26318Section 143(3)17Section 14814Section 54F12Section 69A8Addition to Income8Section 547Reassessment6

THE DCIT-3(1), INDORE vs. KUMARI SHEETAL GARG, INDORE

In the result Ground No. 1& 2 of the

ITA 254/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09 Dcit-3(1), Kumari Sheetal Garg, Indore Vs. 8/2, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Afhpg9179G Revenue By Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2019 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 53ASection 54F

147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act was not valid. Sheetal Garg 11. It is an admitted fact that the assessee’s case is pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09, and the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) completed on 30.12.2010 and the transactions giving rise to capital gain were thoroughly examined by the Ld.A.O while allowed the deduction u/s 54F

Section 143(2)4
Exemption4
Unexplained Money4

SARWAR MOHD. KHAN,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 (1), BHOPAL

Appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground itself

ITA 511/IND/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 54F

u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act Ld. A.O also categorically observed that the assessee’s non compliance to the provisions of Section 54F of the Act by withdrawing an amount of Rs.26,00,000/- before the expiry of time provided in Section 54F of the Act is no more in dispute as the assessee has offered

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/IND/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Deshpandey, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Deshpandey, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 134/IND/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Deshpandey, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Deshpandey, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69A

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

PRADEEP KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. CIT-I INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

ITA 531/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Pradeep Khandelwal, Pr. Cit (1), बनाम/ 196,Bajrang Nagar, Indore. Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Akppk2676R Assessee By None Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.08.2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 54Section 54F

54F of the I. T. Act, 1961, was allowed without examining the conditions for allowance of the same.” 4. The assessee has filed copy of re-assessment order dated 19.12.2016. On perusal of same, it is found that the re-assessment was confined to contravention of section 40A(3) and the exemption u/s 54/54F was not a subject-matter

INCOME TAX OFFICER , RAISEN, RAISEN vs. LATE SUDHA AGRAWAL TH. L/H MANMOHAN AGRAWAL, RAISEN

Appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-

ITA 281/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniincome-Tax Officer, Late Smt. Sudha Agrawal, बनाम/ Raisen (L/H: Manmohan Agrawal) Vs. 19/1, Shreeji Enterprise, Near Sbi, Sagar Road, Yashwant Nagar, M.P. (Pan: Abfpa4355G) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 159Section 54F

54F considering the totality of facts and in the interest of justice. Page 3 of 29 ITO, Raisen vs. Late Smt. Sudha Agrawal (L/H: Manmohan Agarwal) ITA No. 281/Ind/2023 and C.O.No. 01/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2016-17 4. The above grounds raised by both sides are qua the validity/invalidity of assessment as also on merits of addition. We would first take-up the validity/invalidity

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 411/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

Section 263

reassessment proceedings since those notices were in their knowledge as they were served physically. However, show cause notices and order passed by the Ld Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Indore was never served physically to the appellant as a result of which the appellant was totally unaware of the fact that show cause notices had been issued and order

LATE VINAYAK PURANIK THROUGH LEGAL HEIR YASH PURANIK,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), INDORE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 911/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshilate Vinayak Puranik Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ Through L/H Yash 3(2), Vs. Puranik, Indore 7/4, New Palasia, Indore

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 253Section 54FSection 68

147. The re-opening is bad in law and hence the assessment be annulled. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 16,00,000/- on account of capital gains for sale of the house. The Ld. CIT(A)(NFAC) further erred in not allowing the deduction u/s 54F and 54EC. The same