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 56(2)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi415Mumbai312Bangalore117Chandigarh79Jaipur75Chennai57Kolkata50Indore45Ahmedabad32Guwahati30Raipur27Hyderabad25Lucknow23Pune19Patna18Nagpur16Jodhpur14Cochin14Cuttack11Agra11Surat10Telangana8SC8Rajkot6Amritsar5Panaji4Karnataka4Allahabad4Ranchi3Dehradun2Orissa2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 244A5Section 124Section 173(1)3Addition to Income3

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

56,39,522/-; the Assessee grieves against denial of 3% addl. interest envisaged u/s 244A(1A) for the 6 period between 28.12.2017 i.e., date of ITAT order and 4.5.2019 i.e., the date on which refund was finally granted; this period being seventeen months, the Assessee quantifies the interest amount at Rs.58.65 crore. 6. SUBMISSIONS CANVASSED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE

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

56 I.T.R. 674.] . The learned judges held that the effect of the decision in Prashar v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas [[1963] 49 I.T.R. (S.C.) 1.] and the later decisions of the Supreme Court was that in so far as the proviso authorises the assessment or reassessment of any person other than the assessee beyond the period of limitation specified in section

M/S MANYATA PROMOTERS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result, the writ petition is rejected

WP/56279/2015HC Karnataka25 May 2016

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice L Narayana Swamy Writ Petition No.56279 Of 2015 (Lb-Bbmp) Between: M/S.Manyata Promoters Pvt. Ltd., A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 & Having Its Office At First Floor, Classic Court No.9/1, Richmond Road, Bangalore 560 025 Represented By Its Authorized Signatory, Mr.B S Mohan.

Section 108A

reassess or demand the difference of actual Property Tax payable. 4. I have heard the learned senior counsel for the respective counsel on record and perused the entire case papers. 5. On the basis of the contentions and counter contentions raised by the parties, the points that arise for consideration are: (i) Whether the petitioner is liable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. SUNITA TONY

In the result, all the appeals which are filed by

ITA/163/2014HC Karnataka31 Aug 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 173(1)

SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:3.9.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.3836/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXVIII ACMM, MACT, BANGALORE AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.11,11,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS