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.

21 results for “reassessment”+ Section 40Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai110Delhi63Chennai61Amritsar38Bangalore36Jaipur27Raipur26Kolkata21Rajkot18Hyderabad17Agra14Indore14Pune12Jodhpur10Guwahati10Cuttack10Nagpur10Patna9Lucknow9Ahmedabad9Cochin7Surat2Dehradun2

Key Topics

Section 26332Section 14829Section 14723Section 143(3)20Addition to Income19Section 6818Section 25017Section 1439Section 147o8Cash Deposit

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 523/KOL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

8
Revision u/s 2638
Reassessment7

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 521/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 522/KOL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 524/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 527/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1094/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 918/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

BARIK BISWAS,BASIRHAT vs. ACIT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 525/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: S/Shri S.M. Surana, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta &
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 263

section 40A(3) of the Act with regard to purchases. We note that the issue on which the reopening was made vis a vis the issue on which the revisionary order was passed were two different issues and therefore, the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/147 dated 25.03.2016 is not amenable to revision

M/S. DILIP KUMAR DAS & SONS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-I(1), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2515/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 250

reassessment making disallowance as noted above u/s 40(a)(ia) and section 40A(3) of the Act as well as addition

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(2), JALPAIGURI vs. M/S. DILIP KUMAR DAS & SONS, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 1605/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 250

reassessment making disallowance as noted above u/s 40(a)(ia) and section 40A(3) of the Act as well as addition

M/S. DILIP KUMAR DAS & SONS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-I(1), JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2514/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 250

reassessment making disallowance as noted above u/s 40(a)(ia) and section 40A(3) of the Act as well as addition

SAMIRUDDIN KHAN,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), , BURDWAN

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

ITA 1169/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

section 40A(3) at ₹ 2,11,244/- were also confirmed. The Bench was of the view that in the interest of justice and fair play, the request of the assessee to set aside I.T.A. No.: 1169/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Samiruddin Khan. the case before the Ld. AO may be allowed so that a proper opportunity of being heard

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2025/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

40A(3) and Section 40(a)(ia) does not attracts to it. Hence, no adverse view is taken on this and addition to the extent of Rs. 1,64,02,821/- on account of payment made to M/s. JMD Construction made u/s 69C of the Act is hereby Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. deleted. But, I find no merit

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2125/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

40A(3) and Section 40(a)(ia) does not attracts to it. Hence, no adverse view is taken on this and addition to the extent of Rs. 1,64,02,821/- on account of payment made to M/s. JMD Construction made u/s 69C of the Act is hereby Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. deleted. But, I find no merit

EDUCO VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(4), KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2024/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

40A(3) and Section 40(a)(ia) does not attracts to it. Hence, no adverse view is taken on this and addition to the extent of Rs. 1,64,02,821/- on account of payment made to M/s. JMD Construction made u/s 69C of the Act is hereby Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. deleted. But, I find no merit

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EDUCO VENTURES PVT LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2144/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

40A(3) and Section 40(a)(ia) does not attracts to it. Hence, no adverse view is taken on this and addition to the extent of Rs. 1,64,02,821/- on account of payment made to M/s. JMD Construction made u/s 69C of the Act is hereby Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd. deleted. But, I find no merit

M/S. JAGMAG MERCANTILES PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 708/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Reassessment proceedings is held to be bad in law. Similarly, jurisdictional High Court in case of G.N. Shaw (Wine) (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 133 Taxman 619 (Calcutta)/[2003] 260 ITR 513 (Calcutta)/[2003] 183 CTR 528 (Calcutta)[12-06-2002], wherein it has held as under:- “17. The statute is a fiscal statute

M/S. JAGMAG MERCANTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 709/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Reassessment proceedings is held to be bad in law. Similarly, jurisdictional High Court in case of G.N. Shaw (Wine) (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [2003] 133 Taxman 619 (Calcutta)/[2003] 260 ITR 513 (Calcutta)/[2003] 183 CTR 528 (Calcutta)[12-06-2002], wherein it has held as under:- “17. The statute is a fiscal statute

RISING RETAILS(P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-4(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1005/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 197(1)Section 250Section 40a

section 143(2) of the Act during the reassessment proceedings.” 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the Ld. AO found that the assessee has debited an amount of Rs.24,01,69,671/- towards contract expense which include an amount of Rs.24,00,84,000/- paid to M/s. Sarda Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. The A.O. issued letter

RAJA UDYOG (P) LTD.,24-PARGANAS (N) vs. ACIT, CC-4(3), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, I.T.(SS)A. No

ITA 944/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.944/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.(Ss)A. No.43/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.(Ss)A. No.44/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rakesh Kr. Das, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 30, 2024

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

reassess income for completed assessments without having any incriminating material. The order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the AO under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and therefore need to be quashed. 2. That under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.76