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.

6 results for “reassessment”+ Section 293clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi293Mumbai162Bangalore94Jaipur89Chennai81Kolkata46Raipur43Patna33Lucknow32Amritsar32Chandigarh23Ahmedabad21Indore18Jodhpur15Surat13Rajkot12Hyderabad8Agra6Cochin6Nagpur6Pune6Visakhapatnam5SC4Allahabad3Panaji3Jabalpur2Cuttack2Calcutta2Ranchi2Telangana2Orissa1Karnataka1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 14827Section 143(2)16Section 143(3)12Section 1475Section 151(2)4Reopening of Assessment4Addition to Income4Reassessment3Section 1312Section 144C(13)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. KAKADE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 854/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri HarikrishanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar &
Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

reassessment proceedings were initiated by the Assessing Officer against the assessee during pendency of scrutiny assessment proceedings. For the sake of clarity, dates and events are reproduced herein below: Dates Events 15.10.2010 Return of income filed by assessee u/s. 139(1) of the Act of Rs.8,69,03,293/- 29.08.2011 Notice u/s. 143(2) issued by the Assessing Officer

2
Section 143(1)2

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX vs. SANDVIK A B.,, PUNE

ITA 608/PUN/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.608/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak & S. SrinivasFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT & Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 151(2)

293 (Guj), which had also taken note of the decision in Indu Lata Rangwala Vs. DCIT (supra) and held otherwise. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further pointed out that the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue had relied on the decision in Amin’s Pathology Laboratory Vs. P.N. Prasad, JCIT (supra) which is case of assessment under section

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. SANDVIK A B.,, PUNE

ITA 623/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.608/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-07

For Appellant: S/Shri Nikhil Pathak & S. SrinivasFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT & Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 151(2)

293 (Guj), which had also taken note of the decision in Indu Lata Rangwala Vs. DCIT (supra) and held otherwise. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further pointed out that the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue had relied on the decision in Amin’s Pathology Laboratory Vs. P.N. Prasad, JCIT (supra) which is case of assessment under section

RATHOD JEWELLERS,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1385/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

293 ITR 565where in, the Hon'ble High Court after considering the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Krishna Chand Chela Ram v CIT has held that right of cross examination from whom the AO has collected the evidence is not required under the income tax law and such assessment was valid under the Act. In the instant

MANSUKH TIMBADIA,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 1713/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Smt. Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

section saves the AO in a case where the notice issued and there is a discrepancy as regards the service of the notice. 6. The ld. DR, Shri Sardar Singh Meena submits that the said assessment reopened on an intimation received from Central Circle and the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 12-06-2012 which

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI MANSUKH T. TIMBADIA,, RAIGAD

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

ITA 72/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Smt. Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

section saves the AO in a case where the notice issued and there is a discrepancy as regards the service of the notice. 6. The ld. DR, Shri Sardar Singh Meena submits that the said assessment reopened on an intimation received from Central Circle and the AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 12-06-2012 which