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 253(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi542Mumbai480Ahmedabad96Kolkata76Bangalore76Jaipur65Indore62Chennai58Chandigarh42Surat39Lucknow28Cuttack27Hyderabad27Allahabad26Raipur25Rajkot25Nagpur23Pune21Patna21Panaji21Agra18Ranchi14Cochin13Dehradun13Guwahati12Amritsar8Telangana7Karnataka6Jodhpur4Varanasi4Kerala3SC3Uttarakhand1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 478Section 244A5Section 2604Section 2633Addition to Income3Section 143(2)2Section 92C2Section 144C2Section 143(3)2

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

reassessment in terms of Section 153(2); it would simply mean that the orders of the higher forum are to be applied & followed by the assessing officer; . it may be borne in mind that longer time limits are provided in Section 153(3) & second proviso to Section 153(5) because it may entail doing the entire process once over

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

WP/11618/2016
HC Karnataka
27 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

253(2A)) cities the reason being minimization of litigation to be the reason for omission. 15. Further, the law on the proposition that ‘what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly’ is well settled. As explained hereinabove, a separate ADR mechanism was created for resolving the disputes relating to Transfer Pricing in International Transactions. Further vide the 2016 amendment

BIDAR NIRMITI KENDRA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS

WP/201260/2018HC Karnataka07 Aug 2018

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice S.N.Satyanarayana W.P.Nos.201260/2018 & 201288/2018 & 201300/2018 (T-It) Between: Bidar Nirmiti Kendra Near Basaveshwara Circle, Naubad Bidar – 585 403 Represented By Its Project Manager Mr. Syed Zafar Ali ... Petitioner (By Ms. Lakshmi Menon, Advocate For Sri Mr. C.K. Nandakumar, Advocate) And: 1. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Kalaburgi – 585 101 2. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Gulbarga – 585 101 3. Income Tax Officer Ward –1, Bidar – 584 101 4. Axis Bank Limited Bidar Branch – 584 101 Represented By Its Manager ... Respondents R

Section 143Section 147Section 248Section 250Section 253Section 264

reassessment. The said remanded matter was taken up for assessment by the third respondent and separate order came to be 5 passed by him on 28.12.2017. The same was subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 248 of the Act, which came to be decided by order dated 19.03.2018 passed under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRAKASH ELECTRIC COMPANY

ITA/884/2007HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

253 These 5 partners who became the shareholders of the successor company were however, allotted only 1210 equity shares of Rs.10/- each on 01.05.1999 and remaining shares were allotted to them subsequently in a phased manner. The first allotment came to the extent of 50 equity shares of Rs.10/- each by subscribing to the Memorandum of Association of the Date

KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

COP/60/2015HC Karnataka21 Aug 2015

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

253 These 5 partners who became the shareholders of the successor company were however, allotted only 1210 equity shares of Rs.10/- each on 01.05.1999 and remaining shares were allotted to them subsequently in a phased manner. The first allotment came to the extent of 50 equity shares of Rs.10/- each by subscribing to the Memorandum of Association of the Date

UNION OF INDIA vs. DR P K SRIHARI

WP/56608/2016HC Karnataka02 Jan 2017

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P S DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.56608/2016 (S-CAT) BETWEEN: 1.UNION OF INDIA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001 2.THE UNDER SECRETARY