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.

19 results for “reassessment”+ Section 27(2)(j)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,012Mumbai645Bangalore266Chennai190Kolkata189Hyderabad174Jaipur160Ahmedabad154Karnataka70Surat66Chandigarh63Indore63Telangana54Pune50Raipur43Nagpur39Guwahati38Cochin36Cuttack35SC25Lucknow24Amritsar23Allahabad23Ranchi22Agra20Patna19Calcutta14Rajkot12Orissa11Jodhpur10Dehradun9Rajasthan4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Kerala3Visakhapatnam3K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1J&K1Gauhati1Uttarakhand1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 26381Section 153A56Section 143(3)37Section 12714Limitation/Time-bar8Section 133(6)7Revision u/s 2637Addition to Income6Natural Justice6

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68
Section 235
Section 142(1)5
Section 153C5

J&K) the notice issued by the ITO to the Assessee under Section 22 (2) of the 1922 Act. The notice was served on an employee of the Assessee who was not authorized to accept such notice. Subsequently, the General Manager of the Assessee applied for extension of time for filing the return, which was allowed by the However

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 357/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

27 to 44 08 Show cause notice- ANN-4 45 to 249 09 Reply of assessee- ANN-5 250 to 256 10 Reply of Notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-6 257 11 Reply of notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-7 258 to 284 12 Reply of notice u/s 142(1) -ANN-8 285 to 319 13 Reply of assessee

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 358/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

27 to 44 08 Show cause notice- ANN-4 45 to 249 09 Reply of assessee- ANN-5 250 to 256 10 Reply of Notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-6 257 11 Reply of notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-7 258 to 284 12 Reply of notice u/s 142(1) -ANN-8 285 to 319 13 Reply of assessee

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 359/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

27 to 44 08 Show cause notice- ANN-4 45 to 249 09 Reply of assessee- ANN-5 250 to 256 10 Reply of Notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-6 257 11 Reply of notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-7 258 to 284 12 Reply of notice u/s 142(1) -ANN-8 285 to 319 13 Reply of assessee

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 360/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

27 to 44 08 Show cause notice- ANN-4 45 to 249 09 Reply of assessee- ANN-5 250 to 256 10 Reply of Notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-6 257 11 Reply of notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-7 258 to 284 12 Reply of notice u/s 142(1) -ANN-8 285 to 319 13 Reply of assessee

GANADHIPATI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL , PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 356/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

27 to 44 08 Show cause notice- ANN-4 45 to 249 09 Reply of assessee- ANN-5 250 to 256 10 Reply of Notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-6 257 11 Reply of notice u/s 142(1)- ANN-7 258 to 284 12 Reply of notice u/s 142(1) -ANN-8 285 to 319 13 Reply of assessee

KUMAR ARUNOSAYA,PATNA vs. A.O., CIRCLE-6, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 33/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

J) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (""यथ") 06.11.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement / 07.11.2023 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant / Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA "नधा#$रती क" ओर से For the Respondent / Smt. Rinku Singh, CITDR राज(व क" ओर से ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021

DCIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 89/PAT/2020[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

J) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (""यथ") 06.11.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement / 07.11.2023 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant / Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA "नधा#$रती क" ओर से For the Respondent / Smt. Rinku Singh, CITDR राज(व क" ओर से ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 94/PAT/2020[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

J) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (""यथ") 06.11.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement / 07.11.2023 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant / Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA "नधा#$रती क" ओर से For the Respondent / Smt. Rinku Singh, CITDR राज(व क" ओर से ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021

KUMAR ARUNODAYA,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, PATNA [NEW – DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, PATNA], PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 96/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

J) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (""यथ") 06.11.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement / 07.11.2023 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant / Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA "नधा#$रती क" ओर से For the Respondent / Smt. Rinku Singh, CITDR राज(व क" ओर से ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. KUMAR ARUNODAYA, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross-objections of the assessee are also dismissed

ITA 98/PAT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Patna07 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 23

J) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (""यथ") 06.11.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement / 07.11.2023 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant / Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA "नधा#$रती क" ओर से For the Respondent / Smt. Rinku Singh, CITDR राज(व क" ओर से ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021

KISHORI CAPITAL MARKETS PVT. LTD.,BBD BAGH (EAST) vs. ITO WARD 2(1), PATNA, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN

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

ITA 249/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 250

27,80,140/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act, a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee by ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna. The learned AO after going over the documents filed by the assessee in support of the claim made by the assessee

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 322/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 328/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 327/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 329/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 325/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 323/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises

NALANDA ENGICON PVT. LTD, PATNA,PATNA vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 326/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

J. P. Goel (2001) 161 Taxmann.com 400 and the brief synopsis of the said judgment and the ratio laid down therein is as under: “Commissioner noticing order passed by the assessing officer prejudicial to the interests of Revenue since the assessing officer had not fully verified the facts – Commissioner noticing that there being a search at the premises