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.

8 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 260Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi165Mumbai58Amritsar34Chennai34Jaipur28Bangalore26Kolkata17Calcutta14Nagpur14Hyderabad11Karnataka8Dehradun8Raipur7Lucknow7Indore6Telangana6Surat6Agra4Ahmedabad3Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh2Kerala2Uttarakhand1Jodhpur1Punjab & Haryana1SC1

Key Topics

Section 26010Section 260A9Section 1488Section 143(3)6Section 1475Section 153C4Section 1444Section 143(1)3Disallowance3

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)

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) challenging the order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench “SMC”, Bengaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short) in ITA No.1364/Bang/2016 relating to the Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. The appellant/assessee is a Co-operative Society governed by the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 and is engaged

Addition to Income3
Deduction2
Reopening of Assessment2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

ITA/705/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

147 of the Act and the object of reassessment proceedings. Such an interpretation would be reading that judgment totally out of context in which the questions arose for decision in that case. It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

ITA/704/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

Section 153C against the assessee for the assessment years 2005-2006 to 2010-2011 and a notice under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 2011- 2012. Therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid search and seizure which was carried under Section 132 of the IT Act, 1961 is concerned, it is relevant to refer to Section 153C

M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

ITA/392/2016HC Karnataka06 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260A

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court on the following substantial questions of law: "(1) Whether the Tribunal is right in applying

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SMT.KAMAKSHI DEVI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

WTA/1/2014HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260A

u/s. 147 is bad in law without appreciating the fact that the department has not accepted the relied upon decision and the same has also been challenged before this Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in ITA NO.244/2013? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is engaged in the business of conducting chits

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 Karnataka06 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

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

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 1992-93. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 28.10.2014 on the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GULBARGA vs. M/S MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/2564/2005HC Karnataka13 Dec 2012

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,N.KUMAR

Section 260Section 260A

260A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of order dated 21-12-2005 passed in ITA No.1306/Bang/2003 for the Assessment year 2000-01, praying to (i) formulate the substantial question of law stated therein; (ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT, as prayed for therein. IN I.T.A. NO. 5020 of 2009 BETWEEN

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

ITA/107/2025HC Karnataka12 Sept 2025

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

Section 10ASection 14ASection 260Section 260A

260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act], impugning a common order dated 08.11.2024 [impugned order], passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [Tribunal] in ITA No.1367/Bang/2024 in respect of the Assessment Year [AY] 2015- 16 and in ITA No.1368/Bang/2024 in respect of AY 2016-17. 3. The Revenue had preferred the said appeals before the learned Tribunal