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.

9 results for “reassessment”+ Section 189(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi359Mumbai195Ahmedabad82Bangalore76Surat54Chennai50Jaipur39Indore35Kolkata27Raipur26Lucknow15Amritsar15Pune11Chandigarh10Visakhapatnam10Karnataka9Jodhpur7Hyderabad6Cuttack6Rajkot5SC5Cochin4Allahabad4Telangana3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Orissa2Agra2Calcutta1Patna1Nagpur1Uttarakhand1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 14836Section 14710Section 244A5Section 1434Section 143(3)4Reopening of Assessment4Exemption3Survey u/s 133A3Section 282

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

3) of section 153, & (ii) giving effect to appellate orders other than those covered by fresh assessment orders in terms of sub-section (5) of section 153; the 2016 Act amended section 244A by introducing sub-section (1A) 7 providing for the grant of additional interest in cases falling u/s 153(5). (b) The orders of the kind made

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Section 1392
Section 1442
Capital Gains2
WP/30388/2015
HC Karnataka
10 Aug 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

Section 143Section 147Section 148

3) Reassessment proceedings will be invalid in case an issue or query is raised and answered by the assessee in original assessment proceedings but thereafter the Assessing Officer does not make any addition in the assessment order. In such situations it should be accepted that the issue was examined but the Assessing Officer did not find any ground or reason

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

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

WP/11385/2016HC Karnataka05 Nov 2019

Bench: S.SUJATHA

Section 143Section 148Section 28

3] of the Act as well as on multiple occasions at the time of filing the returns, original assessment proceedings, reply filed to the first notice under Section 148 of the Act and to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as at the time of survey conducted. - 18 - 15. In the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

WP/12118/2016HC Karnataka05 Nov 2019

Bench: S.SUJATHA

Section 143Section 148Section 28

3] of the Act as well as on multiple occasions at the time of filing the returns, original assessment proceedings, reply filed to the first notice under Section 148 of the Act and to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as at the time of survey conducted. - 18 - 15. In the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income

THE SRI KANNIKAPARAMESWARI CO OP BANK LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal stands allowed

ITA/65/2017HC Karnataka23 Nov 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

189 ITR 285; (2) Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561; and (3) TTK Prestige Ltd., v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengaluru, (2018) 97 taxmann.com 112 - 6 - submitted that reopening of the assessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act was made not on any new material or information

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI H E PANDURANGA

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/211/2013HC Karnataka08 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 158BSection 2Section 260Section 260A

reassessment made protectively under Section 147 for the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 by holding them as infructuous without going into the merits of the case when the issues with reference to unexplained cash credits of Rs.50 Lakhs and Rs.65,10,000/- have been found to be unexplained? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in 3 applying

SHRI. PRASANNA V GHOTAGE, vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

WP/109811/2016HC Karnataka16 Dec 2016

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G.Narendar Writ Petition No.109810/2016 (T-It) A/W Writ Petition No.109811/2016 (T-It) In W.P.No.109810/2016: Between Shri Prasanna V Ghotage, "Prerana Hommes", Ranade Colony, Hindwadi, Belagavi-590006 ... Petitioner (By Sri.Shashank S.Hegde & Sri.Pramod Vaidya, Advocates) & 1. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Inicome Tax Office, Udupi 2. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Office, Opp Civil Hospital, Belgavi-590001 ... Respondents This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 & 227 Of The Constitution Of India Praying To Call For The Records Of The Petitioner'S Case & After Examining The Legality & Validity Thereof Quash & Set Aside The Notice Dated 30.09.2015 Issued By Respondent No.1 Under Section 148 Of The Act To Reopen The Assessment For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Enclosed & Marked As Annexure- A As One Without Jurisdiction & Consequent Order Passed By The Respondent No.2 Disposing Off The Objections Filed By The Petitioner Vide Order Dated 28.10.2016 As Annexure-J.

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153A

3. The petitioner is before this Court praying for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the notice dated 30.09.2015 [Annexure-A in both petitions] issued by the first respondent under the provisions of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking to reopen and reassess the assessment

SHRI. PRASANNA V GHOTAGE, vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

WP/109810/2016HC Karnataka16 Dec 2016

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G.Narendar Writ Petition No.109810/2016 (T-It) & Writ Petition No.109811/2016 (T-It)

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153A

3. The petitioner is before this Court praying for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the notice dated 30.09.2015 [Annexure-A in both petitions] issued by the first respondent under the provisions of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking to reopen and reassess the assessment