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.

6 results for “reassessment”+ Section 10Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai53Delhi46Chennai29Hyderabad29Bangalore12Indore9Jaipur9Pune9Cuttack7Cochin6Kolkata6Lucknow4Rajkot3Surat2Jodhpur2Visakhapatnam1Raipur1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)7Section 907Section 92C6Section 271(1)(c)6Section 143(1)5Section 2503Section 143(2)3Section 2743Disallowance3Addition to Income

M/S FANCY ENTERPRISES,KOLKATA vs. A.O. CIR. 32, , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 797/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Fancy Enterprises Ao,Circle-2 2, Ganesh Chandra, Income Tax Office Avenue, Bentick Street, 10B Middleton, Calcutta Vs. Commerce House West Bengal-700071 West Bengal-700 013 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaff5111B Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

10B Middleton, Calcutta Vs. Commerce House West Bengal-700071 West Bengal-700 013 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAAFF5111B Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, AR Revenue by : Shri P.P. Barman, DR Date of hearing: 09.07.2024 Date of pronouncement : 23.08.2024 O R D E R PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed

2
Transfer Pricing2
Penalty2

JASPAL SINGH BINDRA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal are allowed and the Ld

ITA 1826/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2024AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

reassessment by taking into consideration of the FTC filed by the petitioner on 02.02.2021. The respondent is directed to give due credit to the Kenya income of the Jaspal Singh Bindra; A.Y. 2022-23 petitioner and pass the final assessment order. Further, it is made clear that the impugned order is set wade only to the extent of disallowing

M/S TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2597/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(5)Section 244ASection 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

10B (1) (a) of the Rules; 2.2.3. Without prejudice to above, the rate of guarantee commission recovered by the Appellant in the instant case is more than the rate being upheld by Hon'ble ITAT in plethora of judicial pronouncements wherein, the arm's length rate ranges from 0.20% to 0.53%. 3. Non-grant of interest under section 244A

ACIT, CC- 3(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. HIMATSINGKA SEIDE LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 785/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalit(Ss)A No.17/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 10/24, Kumara Krupa Road, High Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle- Grounds, Bangalore-560001. Xvi, Kolkata. (Pan: Aaach3507N) (Appellant) (Respondent) & It(Ss)A No.20/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner Of Himatsingka Seide Ltd. Vs. Income-Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271Section 92C

10B & 10C of the Rules becomes imperative. 5) That on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the adjustment made by the AO/TPO amounting to Rs. 2,02,00,000/- for international transaction in respect to the corporate guarantee to it's AE. 6) That on the facts

HANSIT MERCHANTS PVT.LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2). , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment cannot be declared as invalid in the penalty proceedings.” (emphasis supplied) It is clear from the aforesaid decision that on the facts of the present case that the show cause notice u/s. 274 of the Act is defective as it does not spell out the grounds on which the penalty is sought to be imposed. Following the decision

M/S MULTITECH SOLUTIONS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. -31, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1443/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, Additional CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

10B, Middelton Row, (PAN: AAHFM4577H) Kolkata - 700071 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Raja Sengupta, Additional CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income