BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

13 results for “reassessment”+ Section 12(1)(C)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi3,368Mumbai2,808Chennai1,029Bangalore1,006Kolkata602Jaipur505Ahmedabad465Hyderabad370Chandigarh231Pune192Raipur164Rajkot152Indore121Amritsar116Surat102Nagpur83Visakhapatnam81Lucknow77Patna76Guwahati66Cochin61Cuttack51Jodhpur45Ranchi41SC37Agra33Dehradun31Allahabad26Karnataka25Telangana19Panaji17Kerala13Orissa11Calcutta11Rajasthan7A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Jabalpur2Varanasi2Madhya Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Uttarakhand1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 2636Addition to Income5Section 12(2)4Section 43Section 112Section 17A2Section 62Section 82Revision u/s 2632Block Assessment

MOHAMMED SHERIEF, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

ITA/2/2019HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: MOHAMMED SHERIEFFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

12 under section 153C of the said Act has not been fulfilled. Inasmuch as this condition precedent has not been met, the notices under section 153C are liable to be quashed. It is ordered accordingly. The writ petitions ITA Nos.2/2019, 5/2019, 6/2019, 8/2019, 7/2019 -25- are allowed as above. There shall be no order as to costs. (Emphasis added

MOHAMMED SHERIEF vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/7/2019HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Appellant: MOHAMMED SHERIEF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
2
Reassessment2
For Respondent:

12 under section 153C of the said Act has not been fulfilled. Inasmuch as this condition precedent has not been met, the notices under section 153C are liable to be quashed. It is ordered accordingly. The writ petitions ITA Nos.2/2019, 5/2019, 6/2019, 8/2019, 7/2019 -25- are allowed as above. There shall be no order as to costs. (Emphasis added

P.K.ABDUL KHADER & BROTHERS vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITR/3/2021HC Kerala06 Dec 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

Section 12(2)Section 25Section 6Section 6(2)Section 8

reassessment is supposedly on the alleged special rebate availed by the Dealer under Section 12(2) of the Act. The alleged circumstances preceding the availing of special rebate are admitted, and hence we proceed to examine the legal grounds raised by briefly narrating as under. 3.1 The Dealer for the return period 2013-14 was paying tax under Section

KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/39/2012HC Kerala07 Dec 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATIONFor Respondent: THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

12 as well as other associations that are before this court- to determine their true character The ITAT appears to have been swayed by the submission that the amount given by the BCCI were towards capital subsidy. 236. To determine whether a given receipt is to be characterized as falling in the revenue or capital stream, the objective for which

KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/40/2012HC Kerala07 Dec 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATIONFor Respondent: THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

12 as well as other associations that are before this court- to determine their true character The ITAT appears to have been swayed by the submission that the amount given by the BCCI were towards capital subsidy. 236. To determine whether a given receipt is to be characterized as falling in the revenue or capital stream, the objective for which

KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, KCA COMPLEX, SASTHAMKOVIL ROAD, vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 2,

ITA/38/2012HC Kerala07 Dec 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATIONFor Respondent: THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

12 as well as other associations that are before this court- to determine their true character The ITAT appears to have been swayed by the submission that the amount given by the BCCI were towards capital subsidy. 236. To determine whether a given receipt is to be characterized as falling in the revenue or capital stream, the objective for which

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S CHOICE FOUNDATION

ITA/180/2019HC Kerala11 Nov 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 2(24)(iia)Section 260ASection 263

12 shall operate so as to exclude any income from the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the income assessed for the assessment year 2010-11 is short by Rs.2,08,91,000/-. 5. In the light of the above discussion, I find that the assessment order passed

K.M. FATHIMA, vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

ITA/76/2018HC Kerala11 Mar 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

reassessment set in motion under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Act, the re- computation of return etc, is illegal and unauthorised. ITA Nos.67/2018, 74/2018, 66/2018, 76/2018, 53/2018, 80/2018 -10- 2.2 The Assessing Authority answered the Principal objection of the assessee namely that the ‘Shelter’ searched by Revenue did not exclusively belong to the assessee’s husband

K.M. FATHIMA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/53/2018HC Kerala11 Mar 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

reassessment set in motion under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Act, the re- computation of return etc, is illegal and unauthorised. ITA Nos.67/2018, 74/2018, 66/2018, 76/2018, 53/2018, 80/2018 -10- 2.2 The Assessing Authority answered the Principal objection of the assessee namely that the ‘Shelter’ searched by Revenue did not exclusively belong to the assessee’s husband

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PREMIER TYRES LTD.

ITA/758/2009HC Kerala19 Jul 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S.PREMIER TYRES LTD

12 disposing of the batch cases are substantially similar. Hence the learned counsel appearing for both the parties have treated ITA No.757 of 2009 as the leading case for making their submissions and have further stated that the consideration of circumstances and questions of law in this appeal would have bearing on the disposal of the other appeals since

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PREMIER TYRES LTD.

ITA/929/2009HC Kerala19 Jul 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S.PREMIER TYRES LTD

12 disposing of the batch cases are substantially similar. Hence the learned counsel appearing for both the parties have treated ITA No.757 of 2009 as the leading case for making their submissions and have further stated that the consideration of circumstances and questions of law in this appeal would have bearing on the disposal of the other appeals since

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. PTL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,

ITA/483/2009HC Kerala19 Jul 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

For Appellant: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S.PREMIER TYRES LTD

12 disposing of the batch cases are substantially similar. Hence the learned counsel appearing for both the parties have treated ITA No.757 of 2009 as the leading case for making their submissions and have further stated that the consideration of circumstances and questions of law in this appeal would have bearing on the disposal of the other appeals since

MOHAMMED SHERIEF, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

ITA/6/2019HC Kerala02 Nov 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

For Respondent: M/S VIVANTA BY TAJ MALABAR
Section 17ASection 4

C. ABRAHAM THIS OP TAX HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP TAX 6/2019 -2- JUDGMENT S.V.Bhatti, J. State of Kerala/Department is the petitioner. M/s. Vivanta by Taj Malabar, Wellington Island, Cochin/dealer is the respondent. The issue arises under the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1979 (for short