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.

69 results for “reassessment”+ Section 127clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi762Mumbai372Jaipur193Bangalore161Chandigarh112Hyderabad104Ahmedabad71Kolkata69Raipur67Chennai63Lucknow40Nagpur38Patna38Pune36Indore34Cochin29Rajkot28Telangana28Amritsar24Guwahati23Surat22Jodhpur19Ranchi18Dehradun17Cuttack14Visakhapatnam12Agra11Karnataka8SC6Allahabad4Calcutta3Orissa3Rajasthan2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Varanasi1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14898Section 14792Section 143(3)86Section 26357Section 6850Addition to Income46Section 143(2)41Reopening of Assessment25Section 25024

AERO DEALCOMM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(3), KOLKATA

ITA 2484/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Assessment Years: 2009-10 Aereo Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd………….………...........................................................……………….…......Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates 2, Garstin Place 2Nd Floor Suite No. 203 Off Hare Street Kolkata West Bengal – 700 001 [Pan : Aacca 5934 G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………………..……………….............….……....…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate & Shri M. Jhawar, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 26Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

reassessment order is bad in law. 12. On the issue of jurisdiction, I find that it is admitted fact that the ITO, Ward On the issue of jurisdiction, I find that it is admitted fact that the ITO, Ward On the issue of jurisdiction, I find that it is admitted fact that the ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata, has jurisdiction

Showing 1–20 of 69 · Page 1 of 4

Section 133(6)24
Disallowance16
Bogus/Accommodation Entry14

I.T.O,WARD-46(4),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. TRIPURARI SINGH., HOWRAH

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 434/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254

section 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised

TRIPURARI SINGH.,HOWRAH vs. A.C.I.T CIR - 46,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 316/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254

section 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised

I.T.O, WARD-46(4),KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. TRIPURARI SINGH, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 435/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254

section 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised

TRIPURARI SINGH.,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O WD- 46(4),KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 315/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Prasad, JCIT
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254

section 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross objections before the Tribunal. We fail to see why the Tribunal should be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,ITO, WARD-2(1) vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1417/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Section 127(1), (2) and (3) has been discussed and decided. I also note that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s Rupasi Bangla Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 909/Kol/2023 for AY 2013-14 dated 14.12.2023 has decided the issue u/s 143(2) in favour of the assessee after distinguishing the decision

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1416/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Section 127(1), (2) and (3) has been discussed and decided. I also note that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s Rupasi Bangla Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 909/Kol/2023 for AY 2013-14 dated 14.12.2023 has decided the issue u/s 143(2) in favour of the assessee after distinguishing the decision

SMITA BISWAS,JALPAIGURI vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1(1), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 464/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 127(1)Section 143(2)

127(1) who are of the rank of Commissioner or above. No document has been produced on the file by the Department to show that the case was transferred by the competent authority from ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly to ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly. Even, there is no document on the file that the ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly

ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S BPO FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 99/KOL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.99/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata……..........................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Bpo Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd. .……........……..…..…..Respondent R No.54,5/1, Clive Row (2Nd Floor), Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaccb5328F] Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 04, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 10.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Revenue Originally Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,000,00/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Share Capital & Premium In The Course Assessment In Absence Of Identity Of The Creditors, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Entire Transactions. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld, Cit(A) Was Justified In The Quashing The Addition Of Rs. 1,85,00,000/-Made By The Assessing Officer Where No Personal Attendance Was Made By Any Director Of The Share Allottee Companies During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & As Such Identity & Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of Transactions Could Not Be Verified.

Section 14ASection 250Section 68

reassessment was held to be without jurisdiction. It was held that Assessment having been made by A.O. in Kolkata, in the absence of any order under Section 127

M/S. STL OVERSEAS (P) LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 599/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Stl Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata Room No. 316, 3Rd Floor, 12, Vs. Amartolla Street, Kolkata-700001. Pan: Aadcs 5333 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Smt. Swatee Baid, Ar Respondent By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.04.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeals, Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’]. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt. Swatee Baid, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 149

127 of the Income Tax 8 M/s. STL Overseas Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2009-10 Rules prescribing the mode of service of notice under the Act. The signing of notice would not amount to issuance of notice as contemplated under section 149 of the Act. In other words, the requirement of issuance of notice under section 149 is not mere signing

ABC INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1645/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Circle 11(1) Abc India Limited Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 40/8, Ballygunj Circular Road Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Vs. Kolkata-700019, West Bengal 700069, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aacca2035J Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukhka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukhka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, DR
Section 119Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144

127(1) who are of the rank of Commissioner or above. No document has been produced on the file by the Department to show that the case was transferred by the competent authority from ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly to ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly. Even, there is no document on the file that the ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly

VEERPRABHU AUTO PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 2(4), KOL, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1218/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250

127 of the Act takes precedence over the normal jurisdiction. We agree with the submission of the Ld. DR and, therefore, the additional ground of appeal is rejected. 7. As regards the merits of the case, since the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act for AY 2016-17 could have been issued up to 30th September, 2017, therefore, this

M/S. NOPANY & SONS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 56(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1301/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 292B

127 of the Act. However for the year under consideration a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued by the ITO of ward 3(1) for scrutiny assessment. The assessee challenged the validity of the notice on the ground that the jurisdiction on the assessee vests with the ITO of ward 56(4). On bringing this anomaly

ITO, WARD - 56(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. NOPANY & SONS, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1621/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 292B

127 of the Act. However for the year under consideration a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued by the ITO of ward 3(1) for scrutiny assessment. The assessee challenged the validity of the notice on the ground that the jurisdiction on the assessee vests with the ITO of ward 56(4). On bringing this anomaly

HIMADRI VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, (OSD), WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 821/KOL/2024[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

127 of the Act, notice under section 142(1) was issued by the Ld. ITO, Ward - 12(1), Kolkata issued requiring the assesses to furnish response to various queries raised therein. 4. 05.10.2017 Reminder to the earlier notices issued on 31.03.2017 and 07.08.2017 was issued by the Id. ITO. Ward-I2(i), Kolkata. 5. 17.10.2017 Returned filed in compliance

GIRIK ESTATE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD 6(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 170/KOL/2022[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

127(1) who are of the rank of Commissioner or above. No document has been produced on the file by the Department to show that the case was transferred by the competent authority from ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly to ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly. Even, there is no document on the file that the ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly

AMIYA GOPAL DUTTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 1(1), JPG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 126/KOL/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144Section 292B

127(1) who are of the rank of Commissioner or above. No document has been produced on the file by the Department to show that the case was transferred by the competent authority from ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly to ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly. Even, there is no document on the file that the ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly

HIRAK SARKAR,HOOGHLY vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-23(1), HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 850/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.850/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hirak Sarkar……………….………..…...………………………….……Appellant 37/C, Bose Para Lane, Serampore, Hooghly-712202. [Pan: Akaps2117A] Vs. Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly……………………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 15, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 12, 2021 Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Against The Order Dated 22.02.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, Kolkata.

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 148Section 151Section 68Section 69C

reassessment order in this case was passed by ACIT, Circle-23(1), Hooghly. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has further invited my attention to the copy of the Income Tax Return to submit that the returned income of the assessee was less than Rs.15 lacs. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that as per the relevant statutory provisions

AJIT KUMAR,BOKARO vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), IT, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 243/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 139Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

127 of the Income Tax Act, 1951 (43 of 1961) and all other powers enabling me in this behalf. 1. Commissioner of Income-Tax (IT & TP), Ahmedabad hereby transfer the case (s), particulars of which are mentioned in column No. 2 and 3 of the schedule hereunder, from the jurisdiction of the officer mentioned in column

TATUN GUHA,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1),, SILIGURI

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

ITA 1644/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2013-14 Tatun Guha………..………….……………………….……….……….……Appellant Namita Nilay, College Para, Siliguri, W.B - 734001.. [Pan: Ahbpg6041R] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Siliguri………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sujit Basu & Rajib Mukherjee, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.07.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 282

127 Income Tax Rules, 1962". (B). For that the Ld. AO has not issued notice u/s.143(2) in prescribed format as per CBDT Instruction F. No. 225/157/2017/ITA II, dated 23.06.2017. Hence, the notice u/s.143(2) issued by the Ld. AO was bad in law and the assessment order of the Ld. AO should be quashed. (C). For that