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”+ Section 153(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,118Mumbai1,408Chennai552Bangalore523Jaipur376Hyderabad300Kolkata193Chandigarh169Ahmedabad162Amritsar132Pune131Indore106Surat82Guwahati79Visakhapatnam78Raipur76Cochin70Karnataka53Cuttack48Lucknow47Nagpur42Rajkot40Telangana39Dehradun38Patna38Ranchi29Jodhpur25Agra22Allahabad22SC17Panaji15Jabalpur6Calcutta5Orissa4Punjab & Haryana4Rajasthan3Gauhati2Kerala2Varanasi2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 153A18Section 1478Section 2506Section 271(1)(c)6Section 158B6Section 1326Section 1444Section 255(4)4Reassessment4Reopening of Assessment

KALYANIKA INFRA MEGA VENTURES PVT. LTD,JABALPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) , JABALPUR

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 49/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 113Section 132Section 132ASection 153Section 153ASection 158BSection 255(4)

3 that thus, the foundation for making search assessments under Sections 153A/153C can be said to be the existence of incriminating material showing undisclosed income detected as a result of search; that on a plain reading of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, it is evident that once search or requisition is made, a mandate is cast upon

3
Addition to Income3
Cash Deposit2

TARUN DEVCON PRIVATE LIMITED,JABALPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JABALPUR

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 50/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 113Section 132Section 132ASection 153Section 153ASection 158BSection 255(4)

3 that thus, the foundation for making search assessments under Sections 153A/153C can be said to be the existence of incriminating material showing undisclosed income detected as a result of search; that on a plain reading of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, it is evident that once search or requisition is made, a mandate is cast upon

SMT. LALITA BAI KHANDELWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/JAB/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur03 Apr 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2007-08 Smt. Lalita Bai Khandelwal V. Income Tax Officer Mangalwara Chouraha Ward 1 Babai, Hoshangabad

For Appellant: Shri L. L. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

3 does not and cannot override the necessity of fulfilling the conditions set out in the substantive part of s. 147 AO has to assess or reassess the income (“such income”) which escaped assessment and which was the basis of the formation of belief and if he does so, he can also assess or reassess any other income which

DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT (A), SAGAR

ITA 195/JAB/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

3. Prayer for Parity With AY 2014-15: Same Facts, Penalty Not Levied Post-Set Aside In a factually identical situation for AY 2014-15, involving similar deposit-based additions and non-compliance due to lack of technical knowledge, the Hon'ble CIT(A) set aside the reassessment order and referred the matter back to the AO. Consequently, no penalty

DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC

ITA 196/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

3. Prayer for Parity With AY 2014-15: Same Facts, Penalty Not Levied Post-Set Aside In a factually identical situation for AY 2014-15, involving similar deposit-based additions and non-compliance due to lack of technical knowledge, the Hon'ble CIT(A) set aside the reassessment order and referred the matter back to the AO. Consequently, no penalty

SAURABH SINGHAI L/H LATE SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN,SAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3 SAGAR, SAGAR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5/JAB/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon‟Ble

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 263

153(2)). There is in fact no, nor could be any, dispute on this aspect of the matter. The assessment proceedings were accordingly commenced, and the subsequent death of the MKJ during the assessment proceedings would not operate to disrupt or impair this jurisdiction, 2 Saurabh Singhai v. ITO since validly assumed, in any manner. Assessment was finally framed