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.

1,758 results for “reassessment”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,313Mumbai1,758Bangalore534Jaipur471Chennai457Hyderabad361Kolkata248Ahmedabad202Pune155Chandigarh151Surat114Visakhapatnam107Indore104Amritsar93Nagpur73Guwahati72Cochin71Patna70Raipur68Rajkot67Lucknow44Cuttack41Ranchi39Agra33Allahabad32Dehradun28Jodhpur25Karnataka16Telangana13SC12Calcutta11Kerala6Orissa6Panaji6Jabalpur5Gauhati2Rajasthan1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 153A99Section 153C83Section 143(3)82Addition to Income67Section 14749Section 14843Section 13240Search & Seizure27Section 6824Section 250

WIND WORLD INDIA INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2370/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

Search & seizure proceedings u/s. 132(1) is only an assessment or reassessment pending on the date of search & seizure proceedings

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Showing 1–20 of 1,758 · Page 1 of 88

...
23
Reopening of Assessment20
Disallowance19
ITA 2372/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

Search & seizure proceedings u/s. 132(1) is only an assessment or reassessment pending on the date of search & seizure proceedings

J.N INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2373/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

Search & seizure proceedings u/s. 132(1) is only an assessment or reassessment pending on the date of search & seizure proceedings

WIND WORLD WIND RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT -2, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2371/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No(S).2370/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Wind World India Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Principal Cit(C)-2, बिधम/ A-9, Enercon Tower, Veera Desai Road, Veera Mumbai Vs. Industrial Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400053 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabce5226C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

Search & seizure proceedings u/s. 132(1) is only an assessment or reassessment pending on the date of search & seizure proceedings

MANISH KASHIPRASAD SEKSARIA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5501/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Bharat Kumar
Section 153C

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct and evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct

MANISH KASHIPRASAD SEKSARIA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5500/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Bharat Kumar
Section 153C

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct and evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct

MANISH KASHIPRASAD SEKSARIA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5499/MUM/2025[20187-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Bharat Kumar
Section 153C

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborati the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct and evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct

MISHRA GANESHA RAM ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5552/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Bharat Kumar
Section 153C

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct and evidence to establish that the contents of pendrive are correct

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4512/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

seizure cannot be sustained unless it is clearly shown that it was done by the authority duly authorized, and all the conditions precedent in relation thereto existed. Thus, before issuance of search warrant in order to take recourse under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the authority competent to issue search warrant must be satisfied that search under

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4513/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

seizure cannot be sustained unless it is clearly shown that it was done by the authority duly authorized, and all the conditions precedent in relation thereto existed. Thus, before issuance of search warrant in order to take recourse under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the authority competent to issue search warrant must be satisfied that search under

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4511/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

seizure cannot be sustained unless it is clearly shown that it was done by the authority duly authorized, and all the conditions precedent in relation thereto existed. Thus, before issuance of search warrant in order to take recourse under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the authority competent to issue search warrant must be satisfied that search under

BALWANT LAXMANJI PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

ITA 8453/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Kumar
Section 153CSection 250

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to est therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents ablish that the contents of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney

BALWANT LAXMANJI PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

ITA 8452/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Kumar
Section 153CSection 250

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to est therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents ablish that the contents of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney

BALWANT LAXMANJI PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

ITA 8454/MUM/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Kumar
Section 153CSection 250

search and seizure conducted in the case of third party therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to est therefore, in the absence of corroborative evidence to establish that the contents ablish that the contents of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney’ of pendrive are correct and authenticated to the extent assessee paid ‘onmoney

A ONE SIZING WORKS,BHIWANDI vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3 , THANE

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

ITA 6458/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 A One Sizing Works, The Asst. Cit Central Circle 3, House No. 1237, Opp. Ganesh 12, A Wing, Ashar It Park, 6Th Compound, Behind Mahakali Vs. Floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Dyeing Narpoli, Industrial Estate, Bhiwandi-421302. Thane West-400604. Pan No. Aajfa 6696 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Simran DhawanFor Respondent: 16/06/2025
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

seizure action, pertaining to the year under consideration. consideration. 4.1 We have heard rival submissions o We have heard rival submissions of the parties f the parties on the specific issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating issue in dispute as regards to the existence of incriminating

ZENITH BARTER PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6615/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

search and seizure operation carried out u/s. 132 of the Act by the Directorate of Investigation, Mumbai, it was found that the assessee had availed unsecured loan from various entities as under :- 1. JMD Sounds Ltd. 2. Kumaon Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3. Nextgen Infotel Pvt. Ltd. 4. Kasturi Towers Ltd. 5. Sulabh Resources Pvt. Ltd. 6. He observed that

ZENITH BARTER PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6613/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

search and seizure operation carried out u/s. 132 of the Act by the Directorate of Investigation, Mumbai, it was found that the assessee had availed unsecured loan from various entities as under :- 1. JMD Sounds Ltd. 2. Kumaon Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3. Nextgen Infotel Pvt. Ltd. 4. Kasturi Towers Ltd. 5. Sulabh Resources Pvt. Ltd. 6. He observed that

ZENITH BARTER PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6616/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

search and seizure operation carried out u/s. 132 of the Act by the Directorate of Investigation, Mumbai, it was found that the assessee had availed unsecured loan from various entities as under :- 1. JMD Sounds Ltd. 2. Kumaon Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3. Nextgen Infotel Pvt. Ltd. 4. Kasturi Towers Ltd. 5. Sulabh Resources Pvt. Ltd. 6. He observed that

ZENITH BARTER PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6617/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

search and seizure operation carried out u/s. 132 of the Act by the Directorate of Investigation, Mumbai, it was found that the assessee had availed unsecured loan from various entities as under :- 1. JMD Sounds Ltd. 2. Kumaon Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3. Nextgen Infotel Pvt. Ltd. 4. Kasturi Towers Ltd. 5. Sulabh Resources Pvt. Ltd. 6. He observed that

ZENITH BARTER PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 6612/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

search and seizure operation carried out u/s. 132 of the Act by the Directorate of Investigation, Mumbai, it was found that the assessee had availed unsecured loan from various entities as under :- 1. JMD Sounds Ltd. 2. Kumaon Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 3. Nextgen Infotel Pvt. Ltd. 4. Kasturi Towers Ltd. 5. Sulabh Resources Pvt. Ltd. 6. He observed that