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.

110 results for “reassessment”+ Section 40aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai110Delhi63Chennai61Amritsar38Bangalore36Jaipur27Raipur26Kolkata21Rajkot18Hyderabad17Agra14Indore14Pune12Jodhpur10Guwahati10Cuttack10Nagpur10Patna9Lucknow9Ahmedabad9Cochin7Surat2Dehradun2

Key Topics

Section 143(3)113Section 14880Addition to Income77Section 153A76Section 14772Disallowance64Section 115J49Section 69C38Section 13236Reassessment

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SILMOHAN GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 449/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2013-2014

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

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

40A(3) of the Act without giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 110 · Page 1 of 6

34
Section 25028
Deduction27
ITA 472/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Mumbai
13 Jun 2023
AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

40A(3) of the Act without giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

SILMOHAN GEMS PVT LTD. COMPANY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 471/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

40A(3) of the Act without giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SILMOHAN GEMS PRIVATE LIMTED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee

ITA 450/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2012-2013

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

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 40A(3)Section 69C

40A(3) of the Act without giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. giving any opportunity to rebut the evidences. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and in 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts

SHAKUNTALA KAMBLE (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF PREMCHAND KAMBLE),THANE vs. DCIT -CENT. CIR `, THANE

ITA 1764/MUM/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Pravin TembhekarFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Selvamani
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 153ASection 253(3)

reassessment proceeding under Section 147 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2007-08 and 2008-09 have not been challenged on behalf of the Assessee. The appeals before the Tribunal are being pursued by the mother of the Appellant being his legal heir and duly constituted attorney of other ITA Nos. 1764-1767 & 1911-1912/Mum/2021

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2622/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2616/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2830/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2823/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RUBBERWALA REALTY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to\n2021-22 stands allowed and the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2018-19\nstands dismissed\nOrder pronounced in the open court on this ...

ITA 3531/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2018-19
For Respondent: \nShri Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

reassess' to complete\nassessment proceedings.\nInsofar as pending assessments are concerned, the\njurisdiction to make the original assessment and the\nassessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one\n10\nITA No.3443 & Ors/Mum/2023\nA.Ys. 2015-16 to 2021-22\nRubberwala Realty\nassessment shall be made separately for each AY on the\nbasis of the findings of the search

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5258/MUM/2024[A.Y 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

40A(3), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 37(1), addition under section 68 in respect of unsecured loans and suspense credits, and addition under section 69A on account of negative cash balances. However, the entire reasoning of the Assessing Officer, as borne out from the assessment orders, proceeds on examination of the books of account, financial

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5220/MUM/2024[A.Y 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

40A(3), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 37(1), addition under section 68 in respect of unsecured loans and suspense credits, and addition under section 69A on account of negative cash balances. However, the entire reasoning of the Assessing Officer, as borne out from the assessment orders, proceeds on examination of the books of account, financial

EAGER CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5221/MUM/2024[A.Y 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 144Section 153A

40A(3), disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), disallowance under section 37(1), addition under section 68 in respect of unsecured loans and suspense credits, and addition under section 69A on account of negative cash balances. However, the entire reasoning of the Assessing Officer, as borne out from the assessment orders, proceeds on examination of the books of account, financial

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 2834/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 147 of the Act was disposed off \nas partly allowed. Assessee has also filed Cross Objection (C.O. \nNo.97/Mum/2024) in Revenue’s Appeal.\nITA No.2845/Mum/2024 [Revenue’s Appeal]\n67. The Revenue has raised three grounds of appeal in ITA No. \n2845/Mum/2024 which are taken up hereinafter in seriatim.\nGround No.1\n68. Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue reads

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2618/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

sections 30 to 43A and,\ntherefore, unless there was a specific\nprohibition for such an allowance, the\ndepartmental authorities would not be\njustified in. adding back the amount under\nrule 5(a), Therefore, even if the debit for\namortization is considered as an\nexpenditure, there is no specific prohibition\nagainst allowing such an expenditure\nunder the provisions of sections

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2620/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Section 37(1) of the Act would not\napply. In this context, we respectfully agree with the\nobservations made by the coordinate Bench in case of\nMilestone Real Estate Fund (Supra). Pertinently, in case of\nM/s Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Co. Ltd. [2025]\n174 taxmann.com 603 (Mad.), identical issue of\ndisallowance of payment made to motor vehicle dealers\nu/s.37

ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, THANE vs. M/S. AMEYA BUILDERS & PROPERTY DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

ITA 2219/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Madhavi
Section 250Section 801B(10)

reassessment / assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing additional claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) without appreciating that as per section 80A(5) of the Act the benefit of enhanced deduction u/s 80IB

M/S. AMEYA BUILDERS & PROPERTY DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, THANE

ITA 1936/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Smt. R.M. Madhavi
Section 250Section 801B(10)

reassessment / assessment under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing additional claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) without appreciating that as per section 80A(5) of the Act the benefit of enhanced deduction u/s 80IB

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objection by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 5714/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.5714/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

reassessment proceedings and there was no explanation of the source of expenditure incurred for making the bogus purchases, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Kanak Impex (supra) restored the addition made under section 69C of the Act. 11. Before considering the applicability of the ratio of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Kanak Impex (supra) to the present

AAACORP EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T.-CIRCLE-14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 966/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal & Aaa Corp Exim India Pvt. Ltd. C-206, Ghatkopar Industrial Estate, Off Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai-400 086 Pan: Aacca8815C ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-14(1)(1) Income Tax Offices, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Yadav, Ld. DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80Section 80ASection 92B

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154 for any assessment year the proceedings of which have been completed before the 1st day of October, 2009.] (3) Where during the course of any proceeding for the assessment of income