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.

483 results for “reassessment”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,635Delhi2,067Chennai915Bangalore824Jaipur597Kolkata483Ahmedabad463Hyderabad397Pune311Chandigarh252Indore175Cochin159Visakhapatnam151Surat143Rajkot136Raipur132Cuttack121Amritsar108Karnataka95Nagpur75Lucknow64Telangana60Patna58Guwahati49Jodhpur49Agra41Dehradun30SC29Ranchi26Allahabad25Panaji11Calcutta10Jabalpur9Kerala8Rajasthan7Orissa4Varanasi4Punjab & Haryana3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 147157Section 143(3)137Section 14899Section 26369Addition to Income56Deduction46Reassessment42Section 25034Reopening of Assessment34Section 68

ITO, WARD - 28(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. SHRI DIPTENDRA NATH GANGULY, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2413/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2413/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito, Ward-28(1), Kolkata Vs. Shri Diptendra Nath Ganguly M/S. Techcreate India, 110/18A, Aayakar Bhawan Dakhin, 2, Gariahat Selimpur Road, Kolkata – 700031. Road (South), Kol-68. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Afdpg 7982 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Pinaki Maji, ACA & Sri Anjan Kr. Maiti, FCA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

deduction of TDS on labour charges. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that Labour Charges to the tune of Rs. 43,17,719/- were

Showing 1–20 of 483 · Page 1 of 25

...
31
Section 143(2)31
Disallowance30

ITO, WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. WIZARD ENTERPRISE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 292/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

reassessment of assessees claiming deduction under section 10A, it has been decided that the claim of deduction under section 10A, shall

LIMTEX INFOTECH LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 7(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed as stated above

ITA 1368/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1368/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Limtex Infotech Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-7(4), Kolkata. [Pan: Aabcl 0088 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT DR
Section 10BSection 14Section 143(3)

reassessment of assessees claiming deduction under section 10A, it has been decided that the claim of deduction under section 10A, shall

I.T.O WD - 7(2),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S WIZARD ENTERPRISES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 280/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri S.S Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, ld.DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

reassessment of assessees claiming deduction under section 10A, it has been decided that the claim of deduction under section 10A, shall

ITO, WARD - 7(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. WIZARD ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed as stated above

ITA 628/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: None appeared on behalf of the revenue
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)

reassessment of assessees claiming deduction under section 10A, it has been decided that the claim of deduction under section 10A, shall

D.C.I.T CIR - 8,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ABCI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 990/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 80I

reassessment order has granted 80IC deduction to the assessee. It should be remembered that in CIT Vs. Sun Engineering (1992) 198 ITR 297 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme

ITO, KOLKATA vs. AJIT KUMAR MINDA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and cross objections of the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 2668/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

reassessment cannot be made on mere\nchange of opinion. Some of the judgments which are relevant are referred to\nherein:\nCIT v. Techspan India (P) Ltd., (2018) 6 SCC 685 : 2018 SCC OnLine SC 435\nat page 690\n“19. The fact in controversy in this case is with regard to the deduction

D.C.I.T, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NEWDEAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1964/KOL/2013[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2017AY 2003-2004
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57

deduction on account of huge interest expenditure was wrongly allowed in the original assessment. He accordingly reopened the assessment and issued a notice to the assessee under section 148 on 24.03.2008 after recording the reasons. During the course of reassessment

THE BURDWAN CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, these three appeals of assessee for the A

ITA 2405/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Pratp Kanti Ghosh, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Pijush Mukherjee, Addl. CIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 263

reassessment cases, the assessing authority had originally granted deduction by way of depreciation of the notional loss incurred by the assessee

THE BURDWAN CENTRAL CO - OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,BURDWAN vs. A.C.I.T CIR - 2,BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1243/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Pratap Kanti Ghosh, , FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)

reassessment cases, the assessing authority had originally granted deduction by way of depreciation of the notional loss incurred by the assessee

PATAKA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8(2), KOLKATA PRESENTLY CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/KOL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 201(1)Section 40

reassessment u/s. 147 on the issue of non-deduction of tax at source on cretins expenses claimed as deduction which

DCIT, CIR-3(2), GANGTOK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN BHANUPATH ROAD NEAR WHITE HALL GANGTOK vs. HEINZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, SIKKIM

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1137/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 35Section 80I

deduction claimed u/s 80IC to Rs.102,02,10,934/- as against claim of Rs.102,80,88,016/-. While initiating the reassessment

SARDA MINES PVT. LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-05(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 867/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 867/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd...............................………………………………………………Appellant 6Th Floor, Circular Court, 8, Ajc Bose Road, Kolkata – 700017. [Pan : Aahcs 2419 R] D.C.I.T., Cir 5(2) Kolkata………………………………………………......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 69 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Gupta, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Usman, Cit Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 14, 2017 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Cit – 2, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “1. For That The Order Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -2, Kolkata (In Short ‘Cit’) Dated 28.03.2017 Is Without Jurisdiction & Illegal As None Of The Condition Precedent For Exercise Of The Power Under Section 263 Of The Act Exists And/Or Has Been Satisfied & As Such The Said Order Is Erroneous & Without Jurisdiction & Liable To Be Cancelled. 2. For That The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Was Not In Any Way Erroneous Or Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & As Such The Cit Would Not Exercise Any Power Under Section 263 Of The Act. The Cit Erred In Holding That The Order Of Assessment Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

Section 263Section 35A

deduction of tax at source. It is evident that the points/grounds taken in the notice under reply are entirely unrelated to the points/grounds on which the reassessment

G. S. ATWAL & CO. (ENGG.) PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1421/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

reassessment proceedings, on the merits of the claim for deduction as bad- debt, etc - it is now clear, and the logic

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, KOLKATA - 2, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1136/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1136/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Mcleod Russel India Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, Kolkata-2 Four Mangoe Lane, Surendra Mohan Ghosh Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Pan No. :Aaace 6918 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.S.Saini, Ar & Ms. Priyanka Salarpuria, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.03.2024, Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Kolkata-2, U/S.263 Of The Act For The Assessment Year 2015-2016 On The Following Grounds :- 1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Pr. Cit Has Erred In Passing The Order U/S 263 By Invoking Of Section 263 Of The Act, Although The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I. T. Act, 1961 Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue. 2. For That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Reassessment Order For A.Y. 2015-16 Which Is Sought To Be Revised By The Ld. Pcit U/S 263 Had Neither Considered The Issue Of Eligibility For Deduction U/S 801E Of The 1.T. Act In The Reassessment Proceedings Nor The Reopening Of The Assessment Made On That Ground. Therefore, The Issue Does Not Arise Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The 1.T. Act, 1961. 3. For That On The Facts Of The Case & Law, The Issue Of Notice U/S 263 Of The Act On The Ground That The Assessee Company

For Appellant: Shri N.S.Saini, AR & Ms. PriyankaFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 244ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 801ESection 80I

reassessment order for A.Y. 2015-16 which is sought to be revised by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 had neither considered the issue of eligibility for deduction

DEEPAK BAJAJ ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 569/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 263

deduction of TDS namely i) artists remuneration ii)Studio Hire Charges iii)Interest paid on unsecured loans and iv)Car hire charges , conveyance and dep. etc and not in respect of the issues raised by the ld. PCIT in the order passed u/s 263 of the Act. The reassessment

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 984/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 197(9)Section 263Section 263(2)Section 37(1)

reassessment was any issue raised or decided in respect of the deductions under section 36(1)(vii), (viia) and the foreign

ZULU MERCHANDISE (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 380/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 249Section 253Section 263Section 3Section 5

reassessment was any issue raised or decided in respect of the deductions under section 36(1)(vii), (viia) and the foreign

M/S K.M. KHADIM & CO.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 278/KOL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 263

reassessment was any issue raised or decided in respect of the deductions under section 36(1)(vii), (viia) and the foreign

PANDROL RAHEE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1731/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

reassessment on the ground that the assessee has wrongly claimed excessive deduction under s. 80-O of the IT Act, 1961 and that