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.

9 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai66Hyderabad36Delhi35Jaipur24Mumbai21Surat20Bangalore19Ahmedabad17Jodhpur10Patna9Rajkot9Pune7Indore5Chandigarh5Agra4Amritsar3Raipur3Lucknow2Kolkata2Visakhapatnam2Jabalpur1Cuttack1Nagpur1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 14822Section 14718Section 25013Section 69A12Section 142(1)7Demonetization7Addition to Income7Cash Deposit6Reassessment6

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

Section 1445
Unexplained Money4
Reopening of Assessment4

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

147 of the Act was initiated after obtaining prior approval of the competent authority and a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 01.08.2018 was generated and issued to the assessee for filing the return of income within 30 days from the service of the notice. But the assessee did not comply to the notice. Subsequent notices u/s

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

demonetization as unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and added the same to the income of the assessee. Further, as the assessee had disclosed business income, the balance amount of ₹8,38,62,93/- deposited in the bank account was considered as undisclosed turnover and profit was calculated by applying the rate of 8% on the turnover

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

demonetization (incorrectly mentioned as 08.11.2019 and 31.12.2019 instead of from 08.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in para 2.2), the assessee received cash from the villagers which was deposited in the Central Bank of India and total cash of ₹13,42,000/- was claimed to be deposited and not ₹23,01,901/- as stated

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

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

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

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

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 order and addition made to the returned income in a very cursory manner which is against the provisions of law and renders the appellate order ab initio void and illegal and fit to be quashed. 13. For that, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action

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 order and addition made to the returned income in a very cursory manner which is against the provisions of law and renders the appellate order ab initio void and illegal and fit to be quashed. 11. For that, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action