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.

11 results for “reassessment”+ Section 292clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi435Mumbai318Bangalore249Kolkata145Jaipur96Ahmedabad70Hyderabad58Rajkot47Chennai45Chandigarh38Surat37Raipur31Indore30Amritsar30Cochin26Ranchi25Pune23Allahabad22Karnataka16Cuttack14Lucknow12Patna11Visakhapatnam9Agra9Telangana6Nagpur4Guwahati2Jabalpur1Calcutta1Dehradun1Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Jodhpur1Orissa1SC1

Key Topics

Section 27414Section 271(1)(c)8Section 136Section 143(3)6Section 2716Addition to Income6Section 235Penalty5Section 272A(2)(e)4Section 250

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
3
TDS2
Disallowance2

Reassessment proceedings finalised by an AO without effecting proper service of notice on the Assessee under Section 148 (1) of the Act are invalid and liable to be quashed. (vii) Section 292

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

292(8) of the Act and therefore inference can only be drawn on the facts and provisions of law of the Act after long drawn discussion. Therefore under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 154 of the ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya Act cannot be invoked

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

292(8) of the Act and therefore inference can only be drawn on the facts and provisions of law of the Act after long drawn discussion. Therefore under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 154 of the ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya Act cannot be invoked

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

292(8) of the Act and therefore inference can only be drawn on the facts and provisions of law of the Act after long drawn discussion. Therefore under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 154 of the ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya Act cannot be invoked

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

292(8) of the Act and therefore inference can only be drawn on the facts and provisions of law of the Act after long drawn discussion. Therefore under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 154 of the ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya Act cannot be invoked

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

292(8) of the Act and therefore inference can only be drawn on the facts and provisions of law of the Act after long drawn discussion. Therefore under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 154 of the ITA Nos. 96 & 98/PAT/2021 C.O Nos. 2 & 3/ PAT/2021 AY: 2012-13,2013-14 ,2016-17 Kumar Arunodaya Act cannot be invoked

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)

292 On the basis of the above, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147, finalised it under section 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

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 355/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

section 194J and for the purpose of maintenance of books of account respectively. However, for assessing the income under the head salary, there ought to be the relationship of employer and employee, which can be discerned from the agreement and the terms of contract. It has been held in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Chandigarh

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 354/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

section 194J and for the purpose of maintenance of books of account respectively. However, for assessing the income under the head salary, there ought to be the relationship of employer and employee, which can be discerned from the agreement and the terms of contract. It has been held in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Chandigarh

SANJAY KUMAR MODI,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 41/PAT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Sanjay Kumar Modi Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna / 20B, Arya Nagar Colony, Lodi V/S. Katra, Patna City, Patna Pan No.Afupm7073G अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Indrajit Singh, Cit, Dr

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that concealment of income an Sanjay Kumar Modi furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of MANU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO MARKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy

JOANNA GOKAVI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-1, MOTIHARI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 218/PAT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon’Ble Am Assessment Year:2012-13 बनाम Dr. (Mrs.) Joanna Gokavi Ito, Ward – 1, Motihari / B-19, Anand Niketan, New V/S. Delhi – 110021. Pan No.Amepg 2067 M अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant None ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Ajay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

292 ITR 11 at page 19 has held that concealment of income an Dr. (Mrs.) Joanna Gokavi furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. The Gujarat High Court in the case of MANU ENGINEERING reported in 122 ITR 306 and the Delhi High Court in the case of VIRGO MARKETING reported in 171 Taxman 156, has held that levy