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.

233 results for “reassessment”+ Survey u/s 133Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai684Delhi660Jaipur233Bangalore223Chennai174Hyderabad129Kolkata127Ahmedabad73Rajkot69Chandigarh61Pune59Visakhapatnam59Amritsar50Surat50Patna48Guwahati44Indore40Cochin35Raipur24Agra19Lucknow18Nagpur17Jodhpur16Ranchi14Panaji7Cuttack4Karnataka4Allahabad3Kerala2SC2Dehradun2Telangana2Calcutta1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 153A120Section 143(3)79Addition to Income77Section 13245Section 14740Search & Seizure40Section 153C39Section 6837Section 14830Survey u/s 133A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 197/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (through V.C.) a
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

133A dated 09-12-2014. If the survey action would not have been conducted the assessee would never have disclosed the same in his return ofincome. The assessee was intentionally and knowingly concealing his investment in stock which was unearth while survey proceeding. In view of the above discussions and the facts of the case it is clear that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 233 · Page 1 of 12

...
24
Section 143(2)23
Natural Justice17
ITA 267/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya, Adv. &
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

133A dated 09-12-2014. If the survey action would not have been conducted the assessee would never have disclosed the same in his return ofincome. The assessee was intentionally and knowingly concealing his investment in stock which was unearth while survey proceeding.\nIn view of the above discussions and the facts of the case it is clear that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 196/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Hemang Gargieya, Adv. &
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

133A dated 09-12-2014. If the survey action would not\nhave been conducted the assessee would never have disclosed the same in\nhis return ofincome. The assessee was intentionally and knowingly\nconcealing his investment in stock which was unearth while survey\nproceeding.\nIn view of the above discussions and the facts of the case it is clear\nthat

PINCITY JEWLHOUSE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, CC, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 63/JPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: the date of hearing." 3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 58 days in filing of the present appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of 3

For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik, CIT
Section 10ASection 147Section 253(5)Section 263Section 5

reassessment for assessment year 2011-2012 was initiated and assessed. Benefit of deduction u/s.10AA was granted. 6. That during the year under consideration assessee appellant had filed its income tax return on 30.11.2015 at Rs 4,68,02,540/- PB-I, Pg. 165-202. 7. That survey proceeding u/s 133A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

ITA 377/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 131Section 131(1)Section 133A

reassessment order u/s 143(3) r/w 147, has started with the total income as assessed after giving effect to the order of the CIT (A) u/s 250 dt. 09.04.2019 at Rs. 75,95,250/-. Therefore, the ld. AO cannot blow hot and cold in the same breath now. 3. It is submitted that S. 44AB of the Act has been

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

reassessment for assessment year 2011-2012 was initiated u/s. 147 on\naccount of unverifiable purchases and assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s.\n147 of the Act was passed on 18.12.2017 [PB 52-66]. Benefit of deduction\nu/s.10AA was partially disallowed, subsequently relief was granted to the\nassessee appellant by the Hon'ble ITAT.\n1.12. That survey proceeding u/s 133A

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

ITA 922/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 263Section 5Section 69A

reassessment shall be passed by an Assessing Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in clause (b) of [sub-section (1) of] section 153A or the assessment year referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner:]\n18.1

GANPATI PLAZA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, BEHROR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 466/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

survey disclosing any escapement of income. The AO has reopened the assessment only on the basis of the statement of Shri Sunil Yadav recorded u/s 133A of the Act. Thus, initiation of reassessment

GANPATI PLAZA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, BEHROR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 467/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

survey disclosing any escapement of income. The AO has reopened the assessment only on the basis of the statement of Shri Sunil Yadav recorded u/s 133A of the Act. Thus, initiation of reassessment

ITO, BARAN vs. GANPATI PLAZA, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 545/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Satish Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (JCIT)
Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148

survey disclosing any escapement of income. The AO has reopened the assessment only on the basis of the statement of Shri Sunil Yadav recorded u/s 133A of the Act. Thus, initiation of reassessment

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LTD ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

ITA 398/JPR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2024AY 2019-2020
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 263Section 5Section 69A

reassessment shall be passed by an Assessing\nOfficer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year\nreferred to in clause (b) of [sub-section (1) of] section 153A or the assessment\nyear referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the\nprior approval of the Joint Commissioner:]\n18.1

LATE SH. BHIM SEN BATRA L/H SH. HIMANSHU BATRA,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 439/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani(CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the IT Act 1961 was carried out on the business premises of the assessee who is a proprietor of M/s. Bhim Sen Ram Swaroop, B-7, New Subji Mandi, Alwar. During the survey, it has been noticed that sale transactions of Rs. 3,14,490/- entered in dasti books were found unrecorded in regular books of accounts which

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 184/JPR/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani(CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the IT Act 1961 was carried out on the business premises of the assessee who is a proprietor of M/s. Bhim Sen Ram Swaroop, B-7, New Subji Mandi, Alwar. During the survey, it has been noticed that sale transactions of Rs. 3,14,490/- entered in dasti books were found unrecorded in regular books of accounts which

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 185/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Oct 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani(CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 133ASection 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

133A of the IT Act 1961 was carried out on the business premises of the assessee who is a proprietor of M/s. Bhim Sen Ram Swaroop, B-7, New Subji Mandi, Alwar. During the survey, it has been noticed that sale transactions of Rs. 3,14,490/- entered in dasti books were found unrecorded in regular books of accounts which

ACIT, AJMER vs. ABHISHEK KUMAWAT, KISHANGARH

ITA 927/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts

ACIT, AJMER vs. PRAKASH CHAND VIJAYVARGIYA, KISHANGARH

ITA 907/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMENR vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

ITA 933/JPR/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

ITA 934/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SHRI MANISH KUMAR SINGHAL, KISHANGARH

ITA 912/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts

ACIT, AJMER vs. ABHISHEK KUMAWAT, KISHANGARH

ITA 928/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

133A was carried out by Investigation wing on the basis of information by FIU-IND suspicious transaction the business cum residential premises of the assessee and statements were also recorded u/s 131. During the survey operation, it was found that assessee maintains bank accounts in different branches of Kishangarh and desposited money below the threshold limit. As the facts