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.

2 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 54B(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi32Raipur10Jaipur10Ahmedabad6Bangalore5Indore5Chennai5Surat4Mumbai3Dehradun3Nagpur2Pune1Jodhpur1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 54B12Section 1474Section 1482Section 143(1)2Capital Gains2Exemption2Deduction2Reassessment2Reopening of Assessment

SHRI PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTE (HUF), NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(4),, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 377/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Saket BhattadFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act is not valid, before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) discussed the same in detail at para 8 of the impugned order. The CIT(A) held the AO rightly formed an opinion that there was no detailed examination of the issue u/s. 54B of the Act in the intimation proceedings. The relevant portion

2

PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTEM(HUF),NAGPUR vs. I.T.O.(TDS) WARD -1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 547/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Saket BhattadFor Respondent: Smt. Rashmi Mathur
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act is not valid, before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) discussed the same in detail at para 8 of the impugned order. The CIT(A) held the AO rightly formed an opinion that there was no detailed examination of the issue u/s. 54B of the Act in the intimation proceedings. The relevant portion