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.

40 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,160Mumbai888Chennai339Ahmedabad336Bangalore296Jaipur270Kolkata212Hyderabad176Pune150Chandigarh124Rajkot108Indore107Amritsar105Surat104Visakhapatnam77Raipur66Nagpur60Cochin43Guwahati40Patna40Agra37Lucknow28Jodhpur23Cuttack17Allahabad16Varanasi7Jabalpur5Panaji4Dehradun3Ranchi2Orissa2Karnataka1Gauhati1SC1

Key Topics

Section 153A50Section 14742Section 69A39Addition to Income33Section 14832Section 25030Unexplained Money24Section 142(1)22Section 144

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

147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving his findings as under: “6. Decision: I have considered the facts of the case, written submission and case laws relied upon by the appellant as against the observations

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

21
Section 153D16
Survey u/s 133A16
Cash Deposit16

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

deposit appeared in bank account was unexplained. In the instant case was reopened u/s 147 of the income tax Act 1961. A notice u/s 148 dated 01.08.2018 has been alleged to have been served on the assessee. But such notice was neither served on appellant on any occasion nor intimated regarding issuance of such notice to the appellant even after

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

u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 25.03.2022. 1.1. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, ['the CIT(A)'] erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, vide order passed under section

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

cash deposit during the demonetization period, case of the assessee was picked up and notice u/s. 148 of the Act issued for carrying out the assessment proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act. In the course of the reassessment

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

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)

deposited all the amount credited in accounts is departmental advance to carry our work, cash withdrawn is for carry out departmental work. there is no specific contract I am government servant and worked as per the direction of superior officer as I was intrusted in carry out the departmental work it is not business receipts. DETAILS OF DEPARTMENTAL WORK CARRIED

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)

deposited all the amount credited in accounts is departmental advance to carry our work, cash withdrawn is for carry out departmental work. there is no specific contract I am government servant and worked as per the direction of superior officer as I was intrusted in carry out the departmental work it is not business receipts. DETAILS OF DEPARTMENTAL WORK CARRIED

PAVAN KUMAR BHAGAT,SAHARSA vs. ITO, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARA

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

ITA 281/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37Section 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). 10. For that the Ld. Assessing officer has erred not serving any notice u/s

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

147 of the Act on the basis of information that the assessee had sold immovable property (value assessed for stamp duty at ₹33,20,000/-) and had made deposit in cash in a saving bank account amounting to ₹62,25,000/- I.T.A. No.: 321/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Zaimur Rahman. during the relevant assessment year. The assessment was completed

MANOJ KUMAR DAS,BEGUSARAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: 19/07/2025. The Appeal Is Delayed By Around 37 Days. 4. That The Assessee States That The Reason For Delay Is That The Assessee Is Suffering From Hiv Aids & Is Constantly Under Treatment. Copy Of Medical Treatment Is Enclosed.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

u/s 144 of the Act, for the reason that the Id assessing officer could have resorted to estimation of profit rather than treating the entire cash deposits as undisclosed income. 4 Manoj Kumar Das 16. For that the Id. assessing officer has erred in initiating penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 17. For that

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

cash of ₹13,42,000/- was claimed to be deposited and not ₹23,01,901/- as stated by the Ld. AO as is stated. A sum of ₹76,569/- was received as commission income for which the return was not filed as the same did not exceed the maximum amount not chargeable to tax. The Ld. AO made the assessment

AMRENDRA PRATAP SINGH,VARANASI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3(1), GAYA

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

ITA 101/PAT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 69A

cash, issued notices u/s 148 of the Act but no return of income was filed in compliance to the notice issued. Subsequent notices were also not complied with. I.T.A. No.: 101/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Amrendra Pratap Singh. Therefore, the Ld. AO added an amount of ₹90,32,200/- deposited in Canara Bank, ₹18,49,913/- in ICICI Bank

MADHURI DEVI,SAHARSA vs. ITO WARD- 3 (4), SAHARSA

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

ITA 238/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reassessment notice would be without jurisdiction. 4. For that, the Learned AO has erred in framing assessment proceeding without issuing/serving Notice under section 143(2). The Ld AO never issued /served notice u/s 142(1) till date of passing of re-assessment order. 5. For that the Learned AO has erred in making addition

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

cash deposit in his bank account That the evident from the assessment order that there was no return filed by the appellant and h case deposited amount of Rs.1,12,30000/- during the Financial year 2017-18 relevant to Assessment Year 2018-19 Thereafter proceedings u/s 147 has been initiated after approval of competent authorities and issued notice u/s

SANJEEV KUMAR,MUZAFFARPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL, PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose,

ITA 458/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

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

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. Reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee under section 147 of the Income

RAKESH KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PATNA, PATNA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 478/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: The Cit(A). However, The Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal On The Ground Of Delay Without Condoning The Same & Without Adjudicating The Issues On Merits.

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. Reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee under section 147 of the Income

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

u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and the reassessment made is legally bad in law and ab initio void in gross violation of the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) and other various pronouncements made by the Apex Court. 4. For 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

u/s 148 of the Act was issued after satisfaction of Joint Commissioner as alleged to have been submitted by the appellant, however, the AO has himself mentioned that notice was being after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Range -1 Bhagalpur, and asper reassessment order by obtaining necessary approval of the Pr. CIT. Bhagalpur and the entire proceedings, for violation

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)

Cash deposits: ₹10593857/- Term deposits: ₹62,69,99,990/- Contract receipt: ₹8,51,325/- Interest u/s 194A of the Act : ₹31,59,501/- I.T.A. No.337/Pat/2025 IIT, Patna purchases of Foreign currency: ₹329,39,39,545/- Foreign remittance: ₹10,40,20,292 On the basis of the above, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147, finalised it under section 144B

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