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.

3 results for “reassessment”+ Section 144clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,231Mumbai1,081Chennai385Bangalore326Ahmedabad317Jaipur296Kolkata258Hyderabad233Pune158Raipur139Rajkot126Chandigarh108Indore107Surat94Visakhapatnam87Patna81Amritsar69Agra55Nagpur53Lucknow52Cuttack44Jodhpur36Guwahati36Allahabad28Cochin26Telangana25Dehradun24Karnataka20Panaji19SC16Ranchi11Jabalpur7Varanasi4Orissa3Calcutta3Rajasthan2Uttarakhand1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

BISWAJIT BEHERA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), BBSR

ITA/17/2024HC Orissa08 Oct 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

reassessment order, as the case may be, is required to be passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the Commissioner under sub- section (12) of section 144

COMNR.,OF INCOME TAX vs. FALCON REAL ESTATE

ITA/5/2012HC Orissa10 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

COMNR.OF INCOME TAX vs. ORISSA MINING CORP.

ITA/40/2007HC Orissa07 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires