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.

47 results for “reassessment”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai476Delhi405Ahmedabad255Jaipur160Pune121Chennai118Bangalore111Hyderabad103Chandigarh70Kolkata66Surat63Amritsar61Rajkot59Agra54Visakhapatnam52Patna47Indore45Raipur45Cochin28Nagpur27Lucknow22Cuttack16Guwahati14Allahabad13Jodhpur8Panaji5Dehradun5Ranchi3Varanasi3Jabalpur2SC1Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 25047Section 14746Addition to Income38Section 69A36Section 14836Section 153A30Section 14427Section 13218Cash Deposit17Reassessment

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR vs. NANDKUMAR PRASAD SAH, SARAIYGANJ ROAD, MUZAFFARPUR

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

ITA 248/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

section 153A can be made only on the basis of I.T.A. No.: 248/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Nandkumar Prasad Sah. documents/material found in the course of search. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Pr. CIT v. Saumya Construction Pvt. Ltd., SVL Mines Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del) which has discussed

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

16
Section 142(1)15
Survey u/s 133A13

RANJEET SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (5), PATNA

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

ITA 304/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(2)Section 69A

Section-115BBE and consequentially taxation @60%. 14. For that sustenance of addition of Rs. 12,00,000/- and Rs.8,00,000/- u/s 69A are wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case. 15. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with documents and evidences on or before date

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

69A of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 4. For that the learned CIT(A) has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the action of the AO in arbitrarily invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act on the deposits made during the demonetization period without making a specific allegation that

USHASHREE DEVI,BHAGALPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 42/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ushashree Devi, Sabjee Chowk, Barari, Bhagalpur - 812003 [Pan: Aeppd6663K] ……….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna – 1, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna - 800001 ............…..........................…..…..... Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings are bad and ab initio void being based on return of income filed on 19/08/2018 filed under section 142(1) of the Act as the AO has wrongly stated that the same was filed in response to notice under section 147 which was, in fact, filed on 31/01/2019. I.T.A. No. 42/Pat/2021 Ushashree Devi 8. For that

UPAM SHREE,BHAGALPUR vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/PAT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 40/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Upam Shree, C/O Ashok Kumar Mandal, Sabjee Chowk, Barari, Bhagalpur - 812003 [Pan: Ecfps5292P] ……….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna – 1, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna - 800001 ............…..........................…..…..... Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings are bad and ab initio void being based on return of income filed on 19/08/2018 filed under section 142(1) of the Act as the AO has wrongly stated that the same was filed in response to notice under section 147 which was, in fact, filed on 31/01/2019. 10. For that the CIT (A) erred in confirming

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

69A read with section 115BBE of the Act and assessed the same under the Act. 10. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer, without giving any opportunity, much less sufficient opportunity, has erred in holding that the opening balance of Proprietor's Capital (being the closing balance as on 31/03/2015

RAMESHWARI AGRO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 187/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.187&188/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Rameshwari Agro Services Pvt. Ltd.…..…………………....Appellant C/O Lakshman Prasad & Kamlesh Kr. Yadav (Directors), Jai Gurudev Automobile, Gaya Road, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, Bihar-824113. [Pan: Aahcr9701K] Vs. Nfac, Delhi…………………….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 24, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Dated 29.07.24 & 31.07.24 Passed By The Nfac ["Cit(A)"]. Since The Issues Involved In Ita Nos.187 & 188/Patna/2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Are Identical Except For Figures & Assessment Years, Both Appeals Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, The Facts Are First Taken From Ita No.187/Patna/2025. 2. Ita No. 187/Patna/ 2025 - A.Y. 2017-18 - Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144, by treating the entire deposit of Rs.5,17,1450 as unexplained money under Section 69A

RAMESHWARI AGRO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 188/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Patna24 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.187&188/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Rameshwari Agro Services Pvt. Ltd.…..…………………....Appellant C/O Lakshman Prasad & Kamlesh Kr. Yadav (Directors), Jai Gurudev Automobile, Gaya Road, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, Bihar-824113. [Pan: Aahcr9701K] Vs. Nfac, Delhi…………………….……….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 24, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Dated 29.07.24 & 31.07.24 Passed By The Nfac ["Cit(A)"]. Since The Issues Involved In Ita Nos.187 & 188/Patna/2025 For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Are Identical Except For Figures & Assessment Years, Both Appeals Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, The Facts Are First Taken From Ita No.187/Patna/2025. 2. Ita No. 187/Patna/ 2025 - A.Y. 2017-18 - Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Did Not File Its Return Of Income For The Assessment

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144, by treating the entire deposit of Rs.5,17,1450 as unexplained money under Section 69A

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)

reassessment proceedings are bad in law in the absence of reasons recorded for issuing a reopening notice under section 148 of the Act being furnished to the assessee when sought for. It is axiomatic that power to reopen a completed assessment under the Act is an exceptional power and whenever revenue seeks to exercise such power, they must strictly comply

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)

reassessment proceedings are bad in law in the absence of reasons recorded for issuing a reopening notice under section 148 of the Act being furnished to the assessee when sought for. It is axiomatic that power to reopen a completed assessment under the Act is an exceptional power and whenever revenue seeks to exercise such power, they must strictly comply

SUSHIL KUMAR KANODIA,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 237/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Md. A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of DCIT vs Shivali Mahajan in ITA No. 5585/DEL/2015 vide order dated 19.03.2019. 6. The ld. DR on the other hand, relied heavily on the order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. PATNA IRON PVT. LTD., PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 373/PAT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Md. A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of DCIT vs Shivali Mahajan in ITA No. 5585/DEL/2015 vide order dated 19.03.2019. 6. The ld. DR on the other hand, relied heavily on the order

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

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 of the Act. ITA No.: 349/PAT/2025 Assessment

SANTOSH KUMAR,AURANGABAD vs. ITO WARD- 3 (3), AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 211/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.211/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

section 69A of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 3. For that the learned CIT(A) has erred in arbitrarily dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution on behalf of the appellant appreciating the facts available on record, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. For that the learned

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. NUZHAT NASREEN, L/H AHMAD ASHFAQUEKARIM OF NUZHAT NASREEN, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 69/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 67 & 68/Pat/2021 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Vs. M/S. A1-Karim Educational Trust Katihar Lane, Bailey Road, Khajpura Patna-800014 (Pan: Aaatm6309G) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250

69A of the act. So far as the cash of Rs.2,19,20,000/- seized from the residence of Ahmed Ashfaque Karim, substantive addition was made in the hands of assessee trust (which is part of the addition of Rs.4.92 Cr. made in AY 2014-15) but prospective addition of Rs.1.5 Cr. & Rs.1.22 Cr. made in the hands of Nuzhat

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. AHMAD ASHFAQUE KARIM, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 70/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 67 & 68/Pat/2021 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Vs. M/S. A1-Karim Educational Trust Katihar Lane, Bailey Road, Khajpura Patna-800014 (Pan: Aaatm6309G) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250

69A of the act. So far as the cash of Rs.2,19,20,000/- seized from the residence of Ahmed Ashfaque Karim, substantive addition was made in the hands of assessee trust (which is part of the addition of Rs.4.92 Cr. made in AY 2014-15) but prospective addition of Rs.1.5 Cr. & Rs.1.22 Cr. made in the hands of Nuzhat

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. M/S AL-KARIM EDUCATIONAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 67/PAT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 67 & 68/Pat/2021 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Vs. M/S. A1-Karim Educational Trust Katihar Lane, Bailey Road, Khajpura Patna-800014 (Pan: Aaatm6309G) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250

69A of the act. So far as the cash of Rs.2,19,20,000/- seized from the residence of Ahmed Ashfaque Karim, substantive addition was made in the hands of assessee trust (which is part of the addition of Rs.4.92 Cr. made in AY 2014-15) but prospective addition of Rs.1.5 Cr. & Rs.1.22 Cr. made in the hands of Nuzhat

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. M/S AL-KARIM EDUCATIONAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue i

ITA 68/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. Nos. 67 & 68/Pat/2021 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna Vs. M/S. A1-Karim Educational Trust Katihar Lane, Bailey Road, Khajpura Patna-800014 (Pan: Aaatm6309G) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Sudipta Sannigrahi, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT D/R
Section 250

69A of the act. So far as the cash of Rs.2,19,20,000/- seized from the residence of Ahmed Ashfaque Karim, substantive addition was made in the hands of assessee trust (which is part of the addition of Rs.4.92 Cr. made in AY 2014-15) but prospective addition of Rs.1.5 Cr. & Rs.1.22 Cr. made in the hands of Nuzhat

AMAR NATH SINGH,ARA vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 460/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: The Itat. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Given Explanation Which Is As Under:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(5)

69A of the Act and applied section 115BBE of the Act for computation of income tax. 5. Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the details, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the ITAT