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.

31 results for “reassessment”+ Section 150clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi342Mumbai245Jaipur160Hyderabad106Bangalore98Ahmedabad80Chennai71Chandigarh68Pune51Nagpur51Raipur44Amritsar41Rajkot37Ranchi36Allahabad33Kolkata31Indore25Cochin23Guwahati22Surat20Lucknow19Cuttack18Patna10Dehradun7Visakhapatnam6Jodhpur2Agra2

Key Topics

Section 14865Section 14757Section 148A31Addition to Income27Section 26321Section 6815Reopening of Assessment14Section 143(1)13Section 15111

ACIT, CIRCLLE-34, KOLKATA vs. SUBHAS KUMAR KEDIA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1677/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1677/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Acit, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Afnpk 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 05.06.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order U/S.148A(D) & All Subsequent Proceedings. Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Acknowledge The Fact That The Assesse Had Not Expressed Any Grievance Against The Validity Of Order U/S 148A(D) By Moving Any Writ Petition Which Should Have Been Done In Case Of Any Grievance After Getting The Sald Order U/S.148A(D). Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order When The Ld. Cit(A) Has No Jurisdiction To Deal With The Question Whether The 148A(D) Order Was Passed Validly Or Properly As An Order U/S.148A(D) Is Not An Appealable Order Before Ld. Cit(A) As Per Section 246A.

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Loyalka, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 148

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

Reassessment11
Section 25010
Search & Seizure8
Section 148A
Section 149
Section 151
Section 246A
Section 3
Section 69A

section 148, the prerequisite is there should be a valid notice. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the natice was held to be not sustainable. If that be so, the assessing officer cannot be stated to be empowered to make a roving enquiry into other issues which according to him came to his notice during the reassessment proceedings. The foundation

JIYA EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 5(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2142/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2012-2013
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 250

reassessment order under Section 147/143(1) of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 passed by the Assessing officer without disposing of the objection raised by\nthe appellant, contrary to binding principle of law laid down in the judgment of the\nHon'ble Supreme Court whereby it has been stated that non compliance of\nprocedure would not make an order void

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 295/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

150 of the Act. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced as under: "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under section 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an assessment or reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1173/KOL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1173 & 1175/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata.……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Raja Shelters Pvt. Ltd…………………….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 25A, S. P. Mukherjee Road, Kol- 700025. [Pan: Aadcr5073Q] Appearances By: Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2013-14 Against Separate Orders Dated 21.02.2025 & 25.02.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

150 of the Act. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced as under: "(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under section 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an Raja Shelters Pvt. Ltd assessment or reassessment

KIPPY ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2727/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2012-2013
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

reassessment\nproceedings were wrongly initiated vide notice dated 14.03.2019 u/s. 148 and that the\nmandatory approval of the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of\nincome tax as required to be obtained u/s. 151 of the act is invalid.\n(b) That the sanctioning authority i.e. the principal commissioner of income tax has not\napplied his mind while granting

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1944/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Himmatsinghka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)

150\n6B, Bentinck Street, Aloka House\n23.01.2012\n10,000,000\nChq\nKolkata-700 001\n27.03.2012\n730,327\nChq\n811,475\n81,148\nPA No. AAACN 8759L\nR.A.Trading Pvt Ltd\n10,570,575\n21.06.2011\n570,575\nChq\nYes\n10,570,575\n1.R.N.Mkukherjee, 5th Floor\n28.03.2012\n10,000,000\nRTGS\nKolkata-700 001\n31.03.2012\n890,164\nChq\n989,071\n98,907\nPan

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJA SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are\ndismissed

ITA 1175/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

150 of the\nAct. For the sake of reference, the said section deserves to be reproduced\nas under:\n"(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 149, the notice under\nsection 148 may be issued at any time for the purpose of making an\nassessment or reassessment

MADHUBAN DEALERS PVT. LTD. PRESENTLY KNOWN AS MADHUBAN DEALERS LLP,KOLKATA vs. PCIT-13, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

ITA 273/KOL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 68

reassessment order u/s. 144 read with section 147 of the Act dated 27.12.1970 itself suffered from the fundamental infirmity and jurisdiction defect thereby rendering all the consequential action and proceeding including revisionary order u/s. 263 as nonest in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR submitted that in an appeal against the order of 263 of the Act which ceased

M/S. DIACH CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HOWRAH vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), KOLKATA - 2,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 697/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.697/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Diach Chemicals & Pigments Pvt. Ltd.………....Appellant Nh-6, Jaladhulagori Dhulaghar Industrial Park, Howrah-711302. [Pan: Aaccd1101A] Vs. Pcit, Central-2, Kolkata…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 25, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2025 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit), Kolkata, Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case The Assessee Fled Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,24,05,910/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act On 23.04.2021 Determining Assessed Income At Rs.4,75,81,150/-. Subsequently, Pursuant To A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act In The Case Of The Diach Group Conducted On 07.12 2021 & Subsequent Dates, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Case Under Section 147 & Passed A Reassessment Order Dated 28.03 2023. In The Reassessment Order, The Ao Made An Addition Of Rs.96,84,5467/- On Account Of Bogus Purchases Under

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 69C

150/-. Subsequently, pursuant to a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act in the case of the Diach Group conducted on 07.12 2021 and subsequent dates, the Assessing Officer reopened the case under section 147 and passed a reassessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2388/KOL/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RAJSHRI IRON INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2385/KOL/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

Section 148A(d) of the Act use a template/general reason to reject the defence of the assessee on merits, namely, "found devoid of any merit because the assessee company has failed to produce the relevant documents in respect of transactions mentioned in show cause notice it is established that the assessee has no proper explanation……" Consequently, this Court

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

ITA 2303/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

150(2) would not stand in the way of\ninitiating proceedings u/s 147:\n11 Reasons for the belief that income has escaped As per separate sheet. (Annex-\"A\")\nassessment.\nDated\n12 Whether the Addl. CIT/ Joint CIT is satisfied on\nthe reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer\nthat it is a fit case for the issue of a notice

RUNGTA IRRIGATION LIMITED,DELHI vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the\nrevenue stand dismissed

ITA 2315/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2013-14
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

150(2) would not stand in the way of\ninitiating proceedings u/s. 147:\nNot applicable.\n11\nReasons for the belief that income has escaped\nassessment.\nAs per separate sheet. (Annex-\"A\")\nDated:\n12\nWhether the Addl. CIT/ Joint CIT is satisfied on\nthe reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer\nthat it is a fit case for the issue

ANJU DARUKA,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1),, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2143/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

150/- resulting NIL Demand/Refund.\n(ii) Survey actions were conducted by the DIT (Investigation), Kolkata on\nvarious hsare brokers during which the share brokers have accepted their role\nin the entire scheme of providing accommodation entries of bogus LTCG/STCG\nin case of penny stock \"BSR Finance & Construction Limited.\"\n(iii) From the in-depth analysis of the return filed

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals\nof the assessee are allowed

ITA 1630/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.2178, 1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17)\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Accpa9340F\Nita No. 1613/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2017-18)\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\Nshri Sk Tulsian, Ar\Nrevenue By\Nshri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr\Ndate Of Hearing:\N03.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N18.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Against\Nthe Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.08.2025, 27.05.2025 For A.Y.\N2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Appeals Are Relating\Nto Same Assessee & Involves Commons Issues, Therefore All These\Nappeals Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity.\Npage 2\Nita Nos.2178,1630,1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\Nsushil Mitruka; Ays 2014-15, 15-16, 16-17 & 17-18\Nfirst Of All We Shall Take Ita No. 2178/Kol/2025 A.Y. 214-15 For\Nadjudication.\Nα.Υ. 2014-15\Nita No. 2178/Kol/2025\N2.\Nthe Issue Raised In Ground No.1 Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A)\Nupholding The Reopening Of Assessment, Which Was Based Upon\Nborrowed Satisfaction Without Examining The Records & Without\Napplication Of Mind & Accordingly, The Reopening Of Assessment Bas\Nbad In Law.\N2.

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

reassessment made by the Ld. AO by ignoring the\nfact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of\nassessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in\nthe case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003]\n259 ITR 19 (SC).\n3. 1. The facts of the case have been discussed while

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SUSHIL MITRUKA, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1613/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1631/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

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

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2178/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-2015

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

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

reassessment made by the ld. AO by ignoring the fact that the objection filed by the assessee to the reopening of assessment were not disposed off as per the procedural laid down in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 3.1. The facts of the case have been discussed while dealing

M/S ROYAL TOUCH FABLON PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 333/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment proceeding without fulfilling the condition as enumerated u/s. 147 of the Act and without independent application of mind. The assessee has also raised another legal issue challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO while the assessment is bad in law in view because of notice u/s. 143(2) not being issued within

M/S. MUSE ADVERTISING AND MEDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2202/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Section 147 was not satisfied. The Ld. AR relied on a series of decisions in support of this contention as well namely, PCIT v. GRD Commodities Ltd (149 taxmann.com 223) [Cal HC], Amiya Sales & Industries v. ACIT (274 ITR 25) [Cal HC], Uni VTL Precision (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (113 taxmann.com 533) [Bom HC], Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing