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.

15 results for “reassessment”+ Section 7(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi5,954Mumbai5,394Chennai1,696Bangalore1,424Kolkata1,329Ahmedabad1,092Jaipur975Hyderabad791Pune734Raipur506Chandigarh493Surat414Indore375Visakhapatnam325Amritsar322Rajkot298Cochin282Cuttack250Karnataka193Patna166Nagpur164Agra159Guwahati132Lucknow131Ranchi110Dehradun107Telangana96Jodhpur78Allahabad64SC46Panaji41Calcutta29Jabalpur24Varanasi15Kerala15Orissa13Rajasthan10Punjab & Haryana5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati3Himachal Pradesh2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1J&K1Madhya Pradesh1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 2636Addition to Income5Section 153A4Section 153C4Section 12(2)4Reassessment4Section 43Section 260A3Section 17A2Section 132

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

7. This Court had an occasion to consider the scheme of Section 153-C of the Act and the conditions precedent to be fulfilled/complied with before issuing notice under Section 153-C of the Act in Calcutta Knitwears as well as by the Delhi High Court in Pepsi Food (P) Ltd. As held, before issuing notice under Section

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
Block Assessment2
Revision u/s 2632
For Respondent:

7. This Court had an occasion to consider the scheme of Section 153-C of the Act and the conditions precedent to be fulfilled/complied with before issuing notice under Section 153-C of the Act in Calcutta Knitwears as well as by the Delhi High Court in Pepsi Food (P) Ltd. As held, before issuing notice under Section

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

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

K.R. RAZIYA, vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

ITA/61/2018HC Kerala14 Mar 2022

Bench: This Court Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Details Of Orders Of Assessment Etc. Are Stated In The Following Table:

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

reassessment set in motion under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Act, the re-computation of return etc is illegal and unauthorized. 3.1 The other heads of the income of assessee scrutinized relate to the purchase of land at Sreerange, Maharastra. The assessing authority in the assessment order recorded the following findings: “1. The lease agreement

K.R.RAIZA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/64/2018HC Kerala14 Mar 2022

Bench: This Court Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Details Of Orders Of Assessment Etc. Are Stated In The Following Table:

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

reassessment set in motion under Section 153A read with Section 153C of the Act, the re-computation of return etc is illegal and unauthorized. 3.1 The other heads of the income of assessee scrutinized relate to the purchase of land at Sreerange, Maharastra. The assessing authority in the assessment order recorded the following findings: “1. The lease agreement

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

7. Paragraphs 234 to 236 and 253 are excerpted hereunder: 234. It is quite evident that the activities of the cricket associations are run on business lines The associations own physical and other infrastructure, maintain them, have arrangements for permanent manpower and have well- organised supply chains to cater to the several matches they host Many such matches

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

7. Paragraphs 234 to 236 and 253 are excerpted hereunder: 234. It is quite evident that the activities of the cricket associations are run on business lines The associations own physical and other infrastructure, maintain them, have arrangements for permanent manpower and have well- organised supply chains to cater to the several matches they host Many such matches

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

7. Paragraphs 234 to 236 and 253 are excerpted hereunder: 234. It is quite evident that the activities of the cricket associations are run on business lines The associations own physical and other infrastructure, maintain them, have arrangements for permanent manpower and have well- organised supply chains to cater to the several matches they host Many such matches

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

reassessment. As mentioned earlier, if the period of limitation is to be reckoned from the date of intimation u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the Commissioner ought to have initiated revisionary proceedings on or before 31.03.2014. In the instant case the notice u/s 263 of the I.T.Act was issued much subsequently, i.e., on 02.05.2016 and order

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

7 2002-03 17.12.2004 Appeal No.ITA 42/R-2/E/CIT- II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1046/2009 8 1999-2000 15.12.2004 ITA-40/R-2/E-CIT-II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1482/2009 3. The substantial questions of law raised in the batch of appeals deal with the exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short

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

7 2002-03 17.12.2004 Appeal No.ITA 42/R-2/E/CIT- II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1046/2009 8 1999-2000 15.12.2004 ITA-40/R-2/E-CIT-II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1482/2009 3. The substantial questions of law raised in the batch of appeals deal with the exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short

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

7 2002-03 17.12.2004 Appeal No.ITA 42/R-2/E/CIT- II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1046/2009 8 1999-2000 15.12.2004 ITA-40/R-2/E-CIT-II/04-05 dated 11.2.2005 ITA No.1482/2009 3. The substantial questions of law raised in the batch of appeals deal with the exercise of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act (for short

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

1. Issue an order or direction calling for the records leading up to Exhibit P5 and quash the same and to restore Exhibit P1 order, 2. Render such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Government Pleader contends that the absence of Section 4(2B) does