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.

6 results for “reassessment”+ Section 115clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi529Mumbai477Bangalore259Chennai167Hyderabad119Jaipur116Chandigarh74Ahmedabad69Raipur50Amritsar47Surat46Guwahati33Indore31Telangana28Lucknow26Allahabad25Kolkata21Pune19Visakhapatnam16Cuttack13Rajkot11Cochin8Patna7Karnataka6Agra5Nagpur4Orissa3Rajasthan3SC3Jabalpur2Dehradun2Varanasi2Calcutta1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 115J7Section 64Section 260A3Addition to Income3Section 1322Section 10B2Section 802Section 46(1)2Section 27(2)(d)2Survey u/s 133A

M/S SANKHLA POLYMERS (P) LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2)

In the result, the appeal relating to the assessment

ITA/1100/2006HC Karnataka29 Jan 2013

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 115JSection 148Section 260ASection 80

reassessing the income for the assessment year 2002-03 by issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act and tax liability had been determined as per the amendment to Section 115JB. 5 7. For the subsequent two assessment years, the assessee being fully aware of the provisions of this Section and having filed returns, they had been assessed

SRI AVINASH LALA CHANDANI vs. SRI P A NIRANJAN

HRRP/105/2014HC Karnataka
2
Revision u/s 2632
20 Jan 2015

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice A.V.Chandrashekara

Section 27(2)(d)Section 27(2)(i)Section 27(2)(j)Section 31(1)(a)Section 46(1)Section 5

115 of C.P.C. The revisional jurisdiction found in Section 46(1)(2) of Karnataka Rent Act 1999 is almost akin to the appellate jurisdiction found in Section 96 of CPC. Hence the revisional Court can reassess

M/S ING VYSYA BANK LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result appeal fails and it is hereby

WA/2458/2010HC Karnataka06 Jul 2012

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,AJIT J GUNJAL

Section 245CSection 245D(1)Section 4

115 C.P.C., in view of amendment brought to the said section by Act 46 of 1999 and not as to whether order passed in exercise of the power under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India is amenable to intra court appeal or not. In the instant case it is no doubt held by the Learned Single Judge that

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VSL MINING COMPANY PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed as being

ITA/32/2020HC Karnataka20 Sept 2024

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

Section 10BSection 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260A

115,89,54,044/- and the balance tax payable at `44,31,32,567/-. 3. It is further forthcoming that a survey under Section 133A of the IT Act was conducted on 25.3.2008 and search under Section 132 of the IT Act was conducted on 1.4.2008 in respect of one Sri Manoj Kumar Jain5, wherein the Revenue alleges to have

PRABHU COFFEE WORKS vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

In the result, we confirm the order of the

STA/507/2010HC Karnataka20 Dec 2013

Bench: JAWAD RAHIM,B.MANOHAR

Section 16Section 22Section 5Section 5(3)(a)Section 6Section 7

reassessment proceedings under Section 12-A of the Act for all the three assessment years and proceeded on the premise that though the coffee seeds was tax suffered, chicory was not tax suffered to qualify for beneficial reduction in rate of tax. The opinion of Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Circle-I is that the coffee seeds purchased locally were

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

reassessed the properties to tax. And that there are several houses that have been constructed in the area. It is also stated that the Bangalore Development Authority has in its Revised Comprehensive Development Plan, 2011, indicated the land in the erstwhile Survey no. 58/1 and 59/1 for the formation of a residential layout and park. Therefore the same could