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.

23 results for “reassessment”+ Section 144Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai436Delhi338Ahmedabad207Chennai200Hyderabad158Pune125Kolkata94Jaipur84Raipur78Chandigarh75Visakhapatnam71Rajkot68Bangalore60Indore49Agra29Lucknow25Patna23Surat22Dehradun16Nagpur13Guwahati13Ranchi11Amritsar11Cochin9Jodhpur7Cuttack7Panaji2Allahabad2

Key Topics

Section 14747Section 14839Section 25023Addition to Income13Section 69A12Section 142(1)12Section 14412Section 144B12Reassessment12Section 143(2)

KASHYAP CONSTRUCTIONS & DEVELOPERS,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIR-4, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 716/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151A

reassessment or recomputation under section 147 of the\nAct through automated allocation, in accordance with risk\nmanagement strategy formulated by the Board as referred to in\nSection 148 of the Act for issuance of notice and in a faceless manner\nto the extent provided in Section 144B

ACIT vs. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WELFARE HUMAN RESOURCES,

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed while the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

11
Limitation/Time-bar8
Penalty8
ITA 119/PAT/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Oct 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Abhi Sarkar, AdvFor Respondent: Ld. DR. Lalita Kumari, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

reassessments w/s 147 the procedure laid down in sections subsequent to section 139 including that laid down by section 144B

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, FOURTH FLOOR, J.P. BHAVAN, DAKBUNGLOW CHAURAHA, PATNA vs. TULSHYAN METALS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is vacated

ITA 340/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: FixedITAT Patna27 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.339&340/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1, Patna……..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Tulshyan Metals Pvt. Ltd…………………………...............……...…..…..Respondent 3D, Shakambari Complex, Sabji Bazar Chowk, Nagla Bihar-800008. [Pan: Aacct2904K] Appearances By: Shri Ashok Kumar Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 27, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Even Date 30.01.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since, The Substantive Issues Are Common In Both The Assessment Years & The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Therefore, The Two Appeals Are Being Disposed Of Through This Single Order. 2. However, In Both The Cases, The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act Through Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Has Been In Dispute, Whereby, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Held That Since Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Not Issued For Both The Years, Following The Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Then The Subsequent Orders Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144, R.W.S 144B Of The Act Would Be Null & Void. However, For The Sake Of Record, The Grounds In Both The Cases Are Extracted As Under:

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

144B of the Act as done vide impugned order dated 24.03.2022. In support of appellant's above legal ground appellant rightfully relied upon plethora of decisions of supreme court in CIT vs Laxman Dass Khandelwal (2019) 108 taxmann.com 183 (SC), ACIT vs Hotel Blue Moon reported in (2010) 321 ITR 362 (supra) and jurisdictional high court decision in case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PATNA, FOURTH FLOOR, LOKNAYAK JAY PRAKASH BHAWAN, DAKBUNGLOW CHAURAHA, PATNA vs. TULSHYAN METALS PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

The appeal is allowed and the order of the High Court is vacated

ITA 339/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Patna27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.339&340/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1, Patna……..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Tulshyan Metals Pvt. Ltd…………………………...............……...…..…..Respondent 3D, Shakambari Complex, Sabji Bazar Chowk, Nagla Bihar-800008. [Pan: Aacct2904K] Appearances By: Shri Ashok Kumar Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 27, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Even Date 30.01.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since, The Substantive Issues Are Common In Both The Assessment Years & The Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Therefore, The Two Appeals Are Being Disposed Of Through This Single Order. 2. However, In Both The Cases, The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act Through Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Has Been In Dispute, Whereby, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Held That Since Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Not Issued For Both The Years, Following The Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Then The Subsequent Orders Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144, R.W.S 144B Of The Act Would Be Null & Void. However, For The Sake Of Record, The Grounds In Both The Cases Are Extracted As Under:

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

144B of the Act as done vide impugned order dated 24.03.2022. In support of appellant's above legal ground appellant rightfully relied upon plethora of decisions of supreme court in CIT vs Laxman Dass Khandelwal (2019) 108 taxmann.com 183 (SC), ACIT vs Hotel Blue Moon reported in (2010) 321 ITR 362 (supra) and jurisdictional high court decision in case

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

144B (9) of the Act shall be non-est if such assessment is not made in accordance with the procedure laid down under this section. It was held that the impugned order was non- est as it is an exact replica of the draft assessment order with the exception of one sentence which shows that no application of mind took

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

144B (9) of the Act shall be non-est if such assessment is not made in accordance with the procedure laid down under this section. It was held that the impugned order was non- est as it is an exact replica of the draft assessment order with the exception of one sentence which shows that no application of mind took

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 321/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 250Section 68Section 69A

reassessment proceeding under Section 147 of the Act and has grossly acted in violation of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd vs ITO reported in [2002] 125 Taxman 963 (SC) and [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC). 17. For that the appellant shall place any other point/points at the time

BINDESHWARI LAL MAHTO,KATIHAR vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 349/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act merely on the ground that an income has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. 3. For that the learned assessing officer has erred in passing an ex-parte order of assessment under section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B

SMT. RANJU KUMARI,JAMUI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (5), LAKHISARAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 339/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

144B of the Act, vide order dated 25-03-2022 at an income of Rs 2,62,77,730/- against the current years income of Rs 3,07,646/-, by making addition of Rs 2,62,77,730/- after treating the entire deposits in bank account as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. 3. For that the learned

BHOLA PRASAD YADAV,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(1), PATNA

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

ITA 288/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

section 148 of the Act. Since the assessee failed to furnish any explanation for the source of cash deposits made during the demonetization period, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') treated the total cash deposits during the period of demonetization as unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and added the same to the income

MOHAMMAD TANWEER ALI IMAM,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5(1), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Mohammad Tanweer Ali Imam, Income Tax Officer, Darul Aman Po Bv College, Ward 5(1), Patna Samanpura, Rajabazar, Vs. Patna-800014 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aanpi1722J Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 201(1)

section 144B of the Act dated 22.12.2021. 06. Before the ld. CIT (A) the assessee did not appear as the assessee was residing outside India and was not served any notice and the order of assessment was affirmed by the appellate authority. 07. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this

IIT PATNA,PATNA vs. DC/AC EXEMPTION CIR PATNA, PATNA BIHAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 337/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.337/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Iit, Patna……………………………………………………………....Appellant Admin Block Bihta, Patna-801106. [Pan: Aaaai2401A] Vs. Dc/Ac, Exemption, Circle-Patna.……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ankit Kumar, Ca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhary, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 20, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 25, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.05.2025 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi [The ‘Cit(A)’] Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, Iit Patna, Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017–18. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Relied Upon Information Available Regarding: Cash Deposits: ₹10593857/- Term Deposits: ₹62,69,99,990/- Contract Receipt: ₹8,51,325/- Interest U/S 194A Of The Act : ₹31,59,501/-

Section 139Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 272A(2)(e)

144B of the Act by determined the total income. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated under section 272A(2)(e) and show cause notices were issued on 28.11.2024. The AO passed the penalty order, levying a penalty of ₹2,34,400/-. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer the assessee challenged the penalty before the CIT(A), who upheld

PATNA SMART CITY LIMITED,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PTN-W-(21)(91), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed

ITA 314/PAT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 2(45)Section 234BSection 250

section 144B of the Act after making the following additions: - Sl.No. Particulars Amount (in ₹) 1. Low net profit construction contractors large claim of refund 13,54,095 2. High liabilities as compared to low income of/receipts 2,93,821 3. Forfeiture of bank guarantee 42,28,00,000 3.1 It is further stated in the Statement of Facts filed that

RANJEET KUMAR (INDIVIDUAL),BEGUSARAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (1), BEGUSARAI

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

ITA 198/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 282Section 69

reassessment were void ab initio as the section 148 notices were not issued through NFAC and instead by the Ld. JAO, which is in violation of section 144B

RAJESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (2), GAYA

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

ITA 171/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271FSection 69A

144B of the Act. 6. The Ld. DR though relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A), had no serious objection for remanding the matter back to the Ld. AO. 7. We have considered the submissions made. A perusal of the appellate order shows that while the Ld. CIT(A) has discussed non- compliance on the part

ANIL KUMAR,NALANDA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 361/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Kumar National Faceless Assessment Centre M/S Raj Trading Company, Nfac, Delhi Harnaut, Nalanda, Patna-803110 Vs Bihar [Pan : Azopc268H] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri AK Rastogi, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 194JSection 40

144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 22nd August, 2021, framed by Income Tax officer, NFAC. 2. The registry has informed that the appeal is time barred by 46 days. The assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay. Perusal of the same indicates that the assessee did not came to know about the impugned order

MADHU DEVI,NAWADA vs. ITO, WARD 2 (3), BIHARSHARIF, PATNA

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

ITA 516/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139Section 143Section 147Section 148ASection 250

section 143 (1), therefore, reassessment proceeding in question is amount to review and based on change in opinion which is not permissible under the income tax act, as such, whole of the proceeding of re-assessment is bad and illegal and order passed on such illegal proceeding is also bad and without jurisdiction. 3. For that the order under challenge

ARCHANA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4 (1), PATNA

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

ITA 338/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceeding has been initiated for making roving and fishing enquiry. The order of assessment as sustained u/s 147 rws 144 rws 144B is arbitrary, unjustified, without jurisdiction, void ab-initio, bad in law, vitiated in law and invalid. The order as passed u/s 147 is fit to be quashed / cancel / annulled. 1.2 For that the order of the assessment

DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 365/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 263Section 40

144B of the Act was completed on 19.03.2023 assessed the total income at Rs. 68,24,861/- in which he observed that that as per section 40(a)(ia) of the Act the AO has not disallowed the certain payments made towards freight charges are covered under the TDS provision , the TDS default is made by the assessee in respect

MD IFTAKHAR ALAM,ARARIA vs. ITO, PURNEA

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

ITA 389/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194HSection 250Section 69A

Section 69A of the Income Tax Act 1961. I.T.A. No.: 389/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Md. Iftakhar Alam. 8. That on the facts and in the circumstances discussed above your honor be pleased to adjudicate the subjects case to delete the entire addition under provision of law and facts remained with this case. 9. For that the appellant craves leave