Search: reassessment | 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.

500 results for “reassessment”+ Section 34clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,148 Mumbai1,939 Chennai685 Bangalore528 Jaipur500 Ahmedabad388 Kolkata357 Hyderabad331 Surat266 Chandigarh225 Pune212 Indore207 Amritsar172 Raipur138 Visakhapatnam129 Cochin128 Rajkot125 Guwahati89 Agra81 Patna73 Nagpur66 Cuttack66 Karnataka62 Jodhpur57 Lucknow57 Telangana51 Allahabad41 Ranchi37 Panaji33 SC25 Dehradun21 Calcutta11 Jabalpur10 Orissa8 Rajasthan5 Varanasi5 Kerala3 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Punjab & Haryana2 Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 153A109 Section 14783 Section 271A83 Addition to Income80 Section 143(3)79 Section 14875 Section 271(1)(c)29 Section 6827 Search & Seizure25 Reassessment

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 771/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

reassessment under section 34 of 1922 Act. It was further held that 'service of notice under section 34(1)(a) within

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Showing 1–20 of 500 · Page 1 of 25

...

23

Reopening of Assessment21

Undisclosed Income21

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 772/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

reassessment under section 34 of 1922 Act. It was further held that 'service of notice under section 34(1)(a) within

GIRIRAJKRIPA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50C

reassessment under Section 34 of 1922 Act." It was further held that "service of notice under Section 34 (1) (a) within

SHRI HARI RAM YADAV,ALWAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALWAR

ITA 215/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 263Section 54B

reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in the notice, a return of his income ...”. Thus it is evident that whereas section 148 specifically requires serving a notice on the assessee, section 263 simply talks of giving an opportunity

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 297/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

section 34(I), as it then stood, a\nnotice of assessment or reassessment could not be issued against a person

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 291/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

34 ITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others 2.6.iii. The appellate jurisdiction is thus limited to the assessment year in question and matters arising from the assessment order. By directing the ld. AO to commence reassessment proceedings (whether for the same year under a different section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 301/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

34 ITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others 2.6.iii. The appellate jurisdiction is thus limited to the assessment year in question and matters arising from the assessment order. By directing the ld. AO to commence reassessment proceedings (whether for the same year under a different section

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 437/JPR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 May 2018AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292C

34 DCIT Vs. Vimal Chand Surana (HUF) clause. Section 151 which requires sanction to be obtained by the Assessing Officer by issue of notice to reopen the assessment under Section 148 has also been excluded in a case covered by Section 153A. The time-limit prescribed for completion of an assessment or reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

ITA 1057/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 997/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 998/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 999/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 294/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/148. Thus, the\nId. CIT(A) must function strictly within the statutory confines of Section 251,\nand any exercise of power beyond such statutory limits such as the\nimpugned direction in the present case is clearly ultra vires and legally\nunsustainable.\n2.6.vi. In the present case, the Id. CIT(A) essentially attempted to do indirectly what

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SILVERTOSS COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 86/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

ITA 789/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 1284/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 596/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

ITA 790/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 597/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 594/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Apr 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 2(22)(e)

reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section