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.

2 results for “reassessment”+ Section 293clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi293Mumbai162Bangalore94Jaipur89Chennai81Kolkata46Raipur43Patna33Lucknow32Amritsar32Chandigarh23Ahmedabad21Indore18Jodhpur15Surat13Rajkot12Hyderabad8Agra6Cochin6Nagpur6Pune6Visakhapatnam5SC4Allahabad3Panaji3Jabalpur2Cuttack2Calcutta2Ranchi2Telangana2Orissa1Karnataka1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 153C5Section 153D4Section 2633Section 153A(1)3Section 153C(1)2Section 142(1)2

SHRI TARACHAND KHATRI,JABALPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE, JABALPUR

In the result, Ground No.1

ITA 21/JAB/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur17 Jan 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Sanjay Arora

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena, D.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153D

293 (P&H) held that “it is an established principle of Law that a party is entitled to show and prove that an admission made by him was in fact not correct and true.” 13 ITA.No.21/JAB/2019 Shri Tarachand Khatri, Jabalpur. 5.2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co., vs., State of Kerala & Another

SHRI NITIN SHARMA,JABALPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 25/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)Section 153CSection 153C(1)Section 153DSection 263Section 7(1)

section, as long as the source of power exercised is available, would be of no moment (L. Hazarimal Kuthiala (supra); Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. [1964] 52 ITR 583 (SC)). There are in fact several aspects to the matter – all in favour of saving the assessment proceedings, and even if the seized material had been