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 251(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai197Delhi122Jaipur92Chennai90Ahmedabad79Bangalore60Chandigarh59Pune47Hyderabad37Nagpur31Raipur30Amritsar27Kolkata27Rajkot25Allahabad20Indore20Lucknow20Guwahati19Surat15Cochin14Patna11Jodhpur8Cuttack7Panaji7Visakhapatnam6Agra5Jabalpur2Ranchi1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 153C85Section 143(3)69Section 153A60Section 25029Section 6828Addition to Income19Section 13212Section 1488Section 143(2)7Unexplained Cash Credit

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

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 109/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

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

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

6
Search & Seizure6
Undisclosed Income6

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

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

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 112/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

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

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

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

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 108/NAG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 251/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153D becomes an empty formality without due process of law and, thus, not sustainable. This is nothing but an approval by way of mere mechanical exercise accepting the draft assessment order without any independent application of mind by the Addl.CIT. Following case laws are relied on:- (i) Sahara India (Firm) Luck v. CIT (2008) 169 Taxman

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 254/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 153A

2 additions made by the AO. The first addition was made qua\ncash deposited in the bank, amounting to Rs.15,04,35,000. The second\naddition was made with regard to cash introduced via an entry operator i.e.,\none, Mr Vipin Garg. The amount added qua this aspect was pegged at\nRs.1,54,07,100.\n11. Despite these additions, which

UMESH SADASHIV THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 240/NAG/2022[F.Y.2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025
Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153D becomes an empty formality without due process of law and, thus, not sustainable. This is nothing but an approval by way of mere mechanical exercise accepting the draft assessment order without any independent application of mind by the Addl.CIT. Following case laws are relied on:- (i) Sahara India (Firm) Luck v. CIT (2008) 169 Taxman

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 263/NAG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

2 days prior to the deadline thereby putting the\napproving authority under great pressure and not giving him sufficient time\nto apply his mind;\n(ii) the final approval must be in writing;\n(iii) The fact that approval has been obtained, should be mentioned in the\nbody of the assessment order.\n14. During the course of arguments, Id counsel

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 245/NAG/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2018-2019

2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval has been obtained, should be mentioned\nin the body of the assessment order.”\n14. During the course of arguments, Id counsel

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

ITA 256/NAG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval has been obtained, should be mentioned\nin the body of the assessment order.”\n14. During the course of arguments, Id counsel

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 259/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

2 days prior to the deadline\nthereby putting the approving authority under great pressure and not giving\nhim sufficient time to apply his mind; (ii) the final approval must be in\nwriting; (iii) The fact that approval has been obtained, should be mentioned\nin the body of the assessment order.”\n14. During the course of arguments, Id counsel

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 260/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

2 (Del HC) dt.13-7-23,\nconcluded that-\n“7. The Tribunal has via the impugned order set aside the additions made\nqua the income of the asseessee inter alia, on the Gr. that there was no\napplication of mind by the Addl.CIT in granting approval u/s153D.\n8. To be noted, an assessment order was framed qua the asseessee\nu/s153A, rws.143

CHANDRAKUMAR MADHUSUDANJI JAJODIA,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 399/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68Section 69A

reassessment is general in nature and is not on specific transaction of assessee. Evidence placed on record is not found to be incorrect or false. Conclusion of escapement of income tantamount to mere change of opinion. Belief of escapement of income could not be derived on the basis of report of Investigation Wing being not specific to transaction of loan

YRCE EDUCATE PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 244/NAG/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

251 (Chd-Trib) dt.7-6-21,\nITA No.1573/ Chd/ 2018; AY16-17, held that-\n“15. ....In the present case before us, we noted that the Addl.CIT did not\nmention anything in the approval memo towards his process of deriving\nsatisfaction so as to exhibit his due application of mind. We noted that the\nAddl.CIT merely approved the letter and the relevant

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 252/NAG/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2016-2017

251 (Chd-Trib) dt.7-6-21,\nITA No.1573/ Chd/ 2018; AY16-17, held that-\n“15. ....In the present case before us, we noted that the Addl.CIT did not\nmention anything in the approval memo towards his process of deriving\nsatisfaction so as to exhibit his due application of mind. We noted that the\nAddl.CIT merely approved the letter and the relevant

ATUL MANOHARRAO YAMSANWAR,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all\nthe appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 250/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2014-2015

2 SCC 181 (SC) observed as under:\n\"58. An order of approval is also not to be mechanically granted. The same\nshould be done having regard to the materials on record. The explanation\ngiven by the assessee, if any, would be a relevant factor. The approving\n54\nUmesh Sadashiv Thakre

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year

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

section 153D dated 29/09/2021 is in mechanical/routine manner without application of mind by Addl.CIT, which is merely a formality, an empty ritual and as such it leads to flagrant violation of the rules of law. 45. The third contention of the learned A.R. is that while granting such mechanical approval dated 29/09/2021 under section 153D for the assessment year