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.

110 results for “reassessment”+ Section 11(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,028Delhi3,595Chennai1,406Bangalore1,201Jaipur820Kolkata761Ahmedabad738Hyderabad570Pune363Indore300Surat276Visakhapatnam272Chandigarh259Raipur232Cochin226Cuttack209Rajkot204Amritsar132Nagpur111Karnataka110Lucknow102Agra102Guwahati97Patna96Ranchi84Telangana55Allahabad50Dehradun45Jodhpur45SC42Panaji29Orissa13Calcutta11Kerala8Rajasthan8Varanasi8Jabalpur6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Himachal Pradesh2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1J&K1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 260128Section 14871Section 14742Addition to Income42Section 143(3)24Reassessment19Section 260A17Section 14316Section 143(2)15Section 153

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GULBARGA vs. M/S MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/2564/2005HC Karnataka13 Dec 2012

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,N.KUMAR

Section 260Section 260A

d) Mens rea is not essential element for imposing penalty for breach of civil obligations or liabilities. It further held that : “It is significance to note that the conceptual and contextual difference between section 271(1)(c) and section 276C of the Income-tax Act was lost sight of in Dilip N. Shroff’s case (2007) 8 Scale

AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

WP/15910/2022HC Karnataka28 Oct 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Showing 1–20 of 110 · Page 1 of 6

13
Deduction11
Survey u/s 133A10
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)

reassessment proceedings by issuing a notice dated 30.06.2021; it is therefore clear that in the facts of the instant case, Section 149(1)(b) was not applicable and it was only Section 149(1)(a) of the I.T.Act that was applicable and consequently, the impugned proceedings pursuant to the Notice dated 30.06.2021 issued beyond he period of limitation, which expired

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED

ITA/909/2017HC Karnataka16 Aug 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

Section 482

reassessment or recomputation under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 144 or section 147 or] [ Section 153- A or clause (c) of Section 158-BC]] unless the reasons for retaining the same are recorded by him in writing and the approval of the [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner], [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner], [Principal Director General or Director

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

ITA/705/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 by bringing to tax all the income which formed part of 6 total income under the original assessment order passed. However, it was noticed that though the assessment proceedings was initiated by issue of notice under Section 143(2), The Tribunal vide said order also knocked down the assessment proceedings completed under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

ITA/704/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 by bringing to tax all the income which formed part of 5 total income under the original assessment order passed. However, it was noticed that though the assessment proceedings was initiated by issue of notice under Section 143(2), The Tribunal vide said order also knocked down the assessment proceedings completed under

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/20040/2019HC Karnataka25 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 254Section 92C

11 section 153(5) of the Act, which makes a period of nine months availing to the AO. So contending, learned Panel Counsel for the Revenue seeks dismissal of Writ Petition. 8. Both the counsel for the Assessee and the Sr. Panel Counsel for the Revenue have filed their Written Submissions and have pressed into service a catena of decisions

DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

WP/11618/2016HC Karnataka27 Sept 2019

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri Writ Petition No.11618 Of 2016 (T-It) Between:

Section 142(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 263Section 92C

d), it is crystal clear that there is no prohibition to the Principal Commissioner to invoke Section 263 of Act 1961 even in an assessment matter where DRP has examined the Draft Assessment Order along with assessee objections. 11. Learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that any short coming relates to twin ingredients of Section

S N SIMHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result there is no merit in this writ petition and the

WP/24840/2012HC Karnataka04 Oct 2012

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy Writ Petition No. 24840 Of 2012 (La-Kiadb) Between: 1. S.N.Simha, Aged About 73 Years, Son Of Late G.R.Swamy, 2. S.N.Yamuna Devi, Wife Of Sri. S.N.Simha, Aged About 66 Years, Both Are Proprietors M/S. Viswabandhu Press & Sree Bharathi Cottage Industries Company, No.16, 1St Cross, Cottonpet, Bangalore – 560 053. …Petitioners (By Shri. S.P.Shankar, Senior Advocate For Shri. K.L.Sreenivas, Advocate For M/S. K.N.L. Associates) And: 1. The State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary, Commerce & Industries

Section 28(4)Section 3

D E R The petition averments are as follows:- 2. The petitioners, who are husband and wife, claim that they are the owners of three residential sites, totally measuring 29500 square feet, culled out of land in Survey no. 58/1 and 59/1 of Thanisandra, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk. The same was said to have been purchased from one Gopalappa

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/324/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

THE PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/197/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/383/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/380/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/381/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/384/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/199/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/198/2021HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/382/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

ITA/385/2018HC Karnataka29 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260

11 - IN I.T.A.No.197/2021: BETWEEN : 1 . THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., NO.25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025, PAN:AABCG 8889P …RESPONDENT

MR. JITENDRA VIRWANI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/17813/2021HC Karnataka22 Jul 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad

Section 10Section 10(1)

d. The assessing officer has failed to carry out the necessary enquiries and investigation to prove the allegation made by him in the assessment order. e. The quantification of the addition based solely on the amounts mentioned in the Board resolution defies logic and is totally perverse. It is also not known whether the amount mentioned in the Board Resolution

SRI SAIDEEPA JEWELLARY WORKS vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES(AUDIT)-2

WP/23858/2013HC Karnataka15 Jul 2013

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

Section 35Section 36Section 38Section 39Section 39(1)Section 52Section 72

D. DEVARAJ URS LAYOUT, DAVANGERE – 577 006. RESPONDENTS. (BY SRI K.M. SHIVAYOGISWAMY, AGA.,) 2 W.Ps.23858-862 & 31180-191/2013 THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ANNEXURES NAMELY, ANNEXURE ‘A’ NOTICE DATED 01.02.2013 BEARING ASSIGN No.14042620/DT. 31.01.2013 ISSUED IN FORM VAT 275 FOR THE YEAR 2005-06 ISSUED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT