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.

5 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 36(1)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai49Chennai33Bangalore26Kolkata8Delhi8Cochin7Jodhpur6Jaipur5Patna3Ahmedabad3Ranchi2Hyderabad2Guwahati1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 14A10Section 1473Disallowance3Section 142(1)2Section 2632Section 143(3)2Section 1482Section 36(1)(viia)2

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 41/JPR/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rolly Agarwal (CIT)
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

u/s 36(1)(viia) 10% of Rural Advance ` Rs. 1,69,81,40,688 7.5% of Total Income Rs. 60,86,23,226 Rs. 2,30,67,63,914 To be restricted up to Rs. 220,50,86,829 Rs.220,50,86,829” This show that the deduction was allowed after proper application of mind and has been allowed

M/S S B B J,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 921/JPR/2009[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur
29 Aug 2017
AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rolly Agarwal (CIT)
Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

u/s 36(1)(viia) 10% of Rural Advance ` Rs. 1,69,81,40,688 7.5% of Total Income Rs. 60,86,23,226 Rs. 2,30,67,63,914 To be restricted up to Rs. 220,50,86,829 Rs.220,50,86,829” This show that the deduction was allowed after proper application of mind and has been allowed

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

u/s 153A r.w.s. 153B/143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2019 at total income of Rs. 43,88,06,060/- buy making an addition of Rs. 43,88,06,060/- on account of deemed income as per provisions of sec. 56(2)(viia) of the Act to the declared income of the appellant. The assessee objected to the proposed

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,VIDYUT BHAWAN, JAN PATH, JYOTI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, , JAIPUR

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 261/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 147

reassessment proceedings ,the AO issued notice u/s 142(1) dt.03.10.2019requiring the assessee to justify the write-off of Rs.200 crore due from Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited in its books of account as bad debts. He further required the assessee to provide proof of including this amount in computing the income for earlier years.In response to same, assessee filed

BARODA RAJASTHAN KHESTRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 253/JPR/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024

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

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

viia) read with Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (e) As per CBDT Instruction No. 17/2008, it has been clearly laid down that provision of standard asset is a contingent liability and a contingent liability cannot constitute deductible expenditure for the propose of Income Tax Act (f) Further, perusal of assessment records reveals that you have claimed Rs.137.05