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.

88 results for “reassessment”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,532Mumbai2,060Bangalore760Chennai684Ahmedabad561Jaipur536Kolkata505Raipur371Pune326Hyderabad292Chandigarh218Surat198Indore182Rajkot166Amritsar139Cuttack125Visakhapatnam115Karnataka111Patna91Nagpur88Agra84Guwahati77Lucknow76Telangana68Ranchi66Cochin63Dehradun54Allahabad53Jodhpur44Calcutta23SC17Orissa12Panaji11Varanasi10Jabalpur10Rajasthan7Kerala6Gauhati2Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana1Uttarakhand1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)127Section 153C85Section 153A83Section 14872Addition to Income62Section 6857Section 26351Section 14740Reassessment30Section 250

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 411/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

natural justice 5. I.T.A. No. 1175/Mum/2012 (ITAT, Mumbai) Smt. DurgadeviMundra –Vs.- Income Tax Officer 6. (2010) 329 ITR 110 (High Court, Delhi) Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. –Vs- Income Tax Officer Reassessment

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

ITA 410/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

28
Natural Justice21
Reopening of Assessment14
25 Feb 2025
AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

natural justice\n5. I.T.A. No. 1175/Mum/2012 (ITAT, Mumbai) Smt. Durgadevi Mundra –Vs.- Income Tax Officer\n6. (2010) 329 ITR 110 (High Court, Delhi) Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. –Vs- Income Tax Officer\nReassessment-Reason to believe-Absence of material or rational belief-AO was made aware of the situation by the Investigation Wing and there is no mention that

SANGEETA SUNIL KADOO,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 235/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Feb 2026AY 2013-14
For Respondent: \nShri Pankaj Kher, CA
Section 142Section 148

reassessment proceedings, alleged non-pertainment of transactions to the relevant assessment year, procedural irregularities in issuing notices, denial of natural justice

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 119/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 114/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 117/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 113/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 115/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 116/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

natural justice which would fatal the assessment. For these arguments, reliance is placed on the following case laws:–  PCIT v. JPM Tools Ltd (2022) 154 taxmann.com 44 (Del HC);  PCIT v. E-City Projects Luck PLtd (2022) 143 taxmann.com 423 (Ori HC);  PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain (huf) (2021) 432 ITR 384 (Del HC);  Divya Exim P Ltd v. DCIT

SHRI CHAITANYA KOCHAR,HINGANGHAT vs. I.T.O., WARDHA

In the result, the impugned

ITA 568/NAG/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Thakar (Adv.) and Shri S.C. Thakar, (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

reassessment made under section 153-A by order dt.30.12.2010 for A.Y. 2002-03 to A.Y.2008-09 in pursuance of search U/s.132(1) dt.07.09.2007 is barred by limitation as provided in section 153-B. The search having taken place in F.Y.2007-08 the assessment U/s.153-A was required to be completed within 21 months from end of F.Y.2007-08 i.e. on or before

ABID MUSTAFA KHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 502/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleabid Mustafa Khan, 301, Mayfair Residency, Raj Nagar Opp. Green Park, Nagpur 440 013, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aqipk9595G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(2), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

reassessment proceedings untenable and arbitrary. 04. The learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in issuing the notice under section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without furnishing the copy of approval granted by the specified authority (Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax) as required under section 151, thereby violating the principles of natural justice

VISHAL KISHORILAL JAIN,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 108/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(40)Section 68Section 69

reassessment u/s 148, overlooking the fact that copy of reasons recorded were not supplied to the assessee in spite of specific request by the assessee. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to note that the AO invoked Section 68 but made the final addition u/s 69 without providing the opportunity to the appellant to respond, violating natural justice

PARTH ENTERPRISES ,BHADRAWATI vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 204/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mohammed LakkadshaFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 147Section 2(14)Section 270ASection 56(2)(x)Section 69

natural justice. 2 Parth Enterprises ITA no.204/Nag./2025 2. The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the addition of 12,61,500 under Section 69 as unexplained investment without proper justification and without appreciating the fact that the property in question is rural agricultural land, which is not a capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Income

SUBHASHCHAND CHANDAK (HUF),NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 85/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 288ASection 68

reassessment u/s 147 initiated, cease to exist as per appeal order, whether additions made on other grounds will be deleted suo-moto or whether same has to be argued separately before appellate forum for its deletion. 6. That, the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of deposit in passbook treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 is against

SUBHASHCHAND SUNDERLAL CHANKAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 33/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 250Section 68

natural justice and is bad in law. 9. That, the assessee craves, leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any objections herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the course of hearing.” 3. At the very outset, we find that there is a substantial delay of 2006 days in filing

SHRI SUBHASHCHAND CHANDAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 26/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 250Section 68

natural justice and is bad in law. 9. That, the assessee craves, leave to alter, amend or withdraw all or any objections herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the course of hearing.” 3. At the very outset, we find that there is a substantial delay of 2006 days in filing

LOKSEWA SHIKSHAN BAHUUDDESHIYA MANDAL,BULDHANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 62/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.62/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Lokeswa Shikshan The Commissioner Of Bahuuddeshiya Mandal, V Income Tax-I, Nagpur. C/O. Dr.Arvindw.Kolte, S Janta College, Buldhana Road, Malkapur – 443101. Pan: Aaatl5306N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanjay Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nagpur Dated 11.11.2014 Passed Under Section 12Aa(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : 1] On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Material Already On Record The Learned Cit Should Have Granted Registration U/S. 12A As Per Assessee’S Application Filed On Lokeswa Shikshan Bahuuddeshiya Mandal [A]

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 148Section 253(3)

natural justice and without due and reasonable opportunity to the Assessee and hence deserves to be set aside. 4] Order rejecting 12-A application on merits merely on the ground of non- appearance of Assessee on a given date is without jurisdiction and also unjust especially when all the relevant material is on record which he failed to consider

AXYKNO CAPITAL SERVICES LTD,,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, NAGPUR

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

ITA 178/NAG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale (JCIT-DR)
Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 68

justice as no opportunity was given to the assessee to cross examine Shri Praveen Kumar Jain whose statement was relied by revenue to make the addition u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3 ITA 178/NAG/ 2017 AXYKNO CAPITAL SERVICES LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE- 1,NAGPUR 1. The Ld. AR of the Appellant, during the course of hearing reiterated the facts

DATTU SAMPAT VANKHEDE,NAGPUR vs. PCIT-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 581/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Dilip LohiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

reassessment afresh is without jurisdiction against the principles of natural justice thereby rendering the order void ab-initio. 10. That

ACIT WARDHA CIRCLE,, WARDHA vs. JAMNALAL SONS PVT LID., WARDHA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 283/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 34/Nag/2015 ननिाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Wardha Circle, Wardha. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri U.U. Kesar
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

natural justice. The assessee is directed to file copy of order passed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, if any, regarding recalled matter and other relevant documents before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) so that the First Appellate Authority can appreciate and decide the case on merits. 9. In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No.34/NAG/2015, ITA No.283/NAG/2015