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.

4 results for “reassessment”+ Section 234clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi457Mumbai277Bangalore172Jaipur117Chennai76Ahmedabad55Chandigarh53Kolkata52Hyderabad40Cuttack39Patna19Nagpur18Agra17Raipur16Guwahati15Lucknow15Indore13Pune11Ranchi9Surat9Amritsar9Visakhapatnam8Dehradun7Rajkot7Cochin6SC5Karnataka4Kerala3Telangana2Jodhpur1Calcutta1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 115J7Section 260A4Section 124Section 1543Section 802Section 2602Section 234A2Exemption2

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BIOPLUS LIFE SCIENCES PVT LTD

In the result, I pass the following:-

ITA/1014/2017HC Karnataka24 Jul 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar Writ Petition No.1014 Of 2017 (T-Kst) Between: M/S. Rainbow Colour Lab, No.13, D.J.C. Complex, Hudson Circle, Bengaluru – 560 027. A Partnership Firm Represented By Its Partner Sri.G.K.Madan Mohan, Aged About 62 Years, S/O Sri.G.V.Krishna Reddy. ...Petitioner (By Sri. M.Thirumalesh, Advocate ) And: 1. State Of Karnataka

Section 12

REASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED UNDER KST ACT, 1957 FOR THE YEARS 1998-99 TO 2004-05 BY THE ASST.COMMISSIONER - 2 - OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (A & R) – 4.9, BANGALORE, R-3 HEREIN, DATED 15.04.2016 IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURES-K, L, M, N, P, Q & R & ETC., THIS W.P. IS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED ON 24.11.2022 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT

M/S MAHESH INVESTMENTS vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/254/2014HC Karnataka
06 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 234Section 234ASection 234A(1)Section 260Section 260A

234 A, B & C can be levied as if such an order is a regular assessment which alone attracts such levy of interest. 2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that assessee on 13.09.1994 filed its return 3 of income as a registered firm for the Assessment Year 1992-93. The Assessing Officer, by an order

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

M/S. THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

ITA/280/2015HC Karnataka01 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 260Section 260A

234 ITR 0070, submitted that Section 154 could be invoked only when a mistake apparent on the record is obvious and patent mistake which can be established sans adjudicating on the points. At most, it was a case for reassessment