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.

18 results for “reassessment”+ Section 269Tclear

Sorted by relevance

Pune18Jaipur16Delhi12Mumbai12Indore8Ahmedabad5Lucknow4Kolkata3Surat3Bangalore3Amritsar2Dehradun1Patna1Chennai1

Key Topics

Section 153A24Addition to Income16Section 13213Deduction13Search & Seizure13Section 13912Section 143(2)12Section 35A8Section 271E7Section 15A

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1812/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora and Riya OswalFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 37Section 68

269T of the Act. The assessee in response to the same gave the details of 16 parties from whom it had taken loan through proper banking channel. The Assessing Officer thereafter asked the assessee to furnish the documentary evidence substantiating the said loans which have been arranged through Sri Sachin Nahar. From the reply submitted by the assessee, he noted

6
Section 143(3)4
Depreciation3

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. NARENDRA SAMPATLAL BAFNA, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 688/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT
Section 1Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

section 269SS & 269T of the Act. Further, this information merged during the course of the Search action u/s. 132(4) of the Act and the statement recorded u/s 132(4) wherein it has been stated that Shri Sachin M. Nahar has admitted that he has submitted the related documents regarding cash loan taken by the appellant assessee Shri Narendra Sampatlal

NILONS ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. JCTI RANGE 2, PUNE

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

ITA 1267/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Smt. N. C. Shilpa
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 269TSection 271E

269T of the IT Act since the assessee repaid the loan/deposits in cash that is other than prescribed mode i.e. through banking channel. We further find that the order dated 30.07.2019 imposing penalty u/s 271E was passed in the name of Sanghavi Foods Private Limited, however the appellate order wherein the order dated 30.07.2019 was challenged, was passed

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1098/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

PRIYANVADA AMOL MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1063/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1094/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1096/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

PRIYANVADA AMOL MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1064/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

PRIYANVADA AMOL MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1065/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1095/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1093/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1097/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1090/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1092/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1091/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of Section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

MERCEDES - BENZ INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,

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

ITA 1865/PUN/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ Ita No. 1865/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 Mercedes Benz India Private Limited. ( Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Private Limited) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase-Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal : Khed, Pune-410 501. Pan : Aabcm 1789L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 35A

reassessment proceedings were not held to be valid. The contention of the Revenue therefore, is that adjudication on admissibility on deduction u/s.35AB could not be examined on merits and, therefore, deduction u/s. 35AB cannot be said to have been allowed in the AY 1995-96 i.e. the first year on merit. During the course of the hearing before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1325/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

reassessment proceedings were not held to be valid. The contention of the Revenue therefore, is that adjudication on admissibility on deduction u/s.35AB could not be examined on merits and, therefore, deduction u/s. 35AB cannot be said to have been allowed in the AY 1995-96 i.e. the first year on merit. During the course of the hearing before

DAIMLER CHRYSLER INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1381/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

reassessment proceedings were not held to be valid. The contention of the Revenue therefore, is that adjudication on admissibility on deduction u/s.35AB could not be examined on merits and, therefore, deduction u/s. 35AB cannot be said to have been allowed in the AY 1995-96 i.e. the first year on merit. During the course of the hearing before