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.

5 results for “reassessment”+ Section 5(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi6,354Mumbai5,816Chennai1,844Kolkata1,500Bangalore1,469Ahmedabad1,030Jaipur737Hyderabad726Pune522Raipur496Chandigarh425Surat385Indore337Rajkot294Amritsar291Visakhapatnam227Cochin223Karnataka214Cuttack194Patna174Nagpur167Agra130Lucknow128Guwahati126Dehradun114Ranchi105Telangana99Jodhpur78Allahabad63SC48Calcutta43Panaji42Jabalpur30Kerala17Orissa16Varanasi15Rajasthan12Punjab & Haryana5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Gauhati3Himachal Pradesh2Madhya Pradesh1Uttarakhand1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1J&K1

Key Topics

Section 14710Section 1486Section 1435Section 1394Section 153A4Section 260A3Section 143(3)3Section 803Reopening of Assessment

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GURGAON vs. M/S BHARATNET TECHNOLOGY LIMITED

Appeals stands dismissed in limine

ITA/100/2019HC Punjab & Haryana06 Nov 2023

Bench: MR. JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA,MS. JUSTICE HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN

Section 153ASection 260A

2 New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. M/s Ferns ‘N’ Petals, 2017 (395) ITR 526, the Tribunal did not interfere in the findings recorded. 4. We have gone through the paperbook and perused the order of the Appellate Authority also. The said authority had decided the issue purely on legal grounds regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to make

M/S KAKKAR COMPLEX STEELS (P) LTDE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF IT

Appeal is allowed and

ITA/312/2005HC Punjab & Haryana09 Jan 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

2
Deduction2
Depreciation2
Addition to Income2
Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 260ASection 80BSection 80H

5) inasmuch as there was a mistake in the order, apparent from the records, while allowing the deduction AJAY PRASHER 2023.02.07 14:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA No.312 of 2005 (O&M) -2- aforesaid which resulted in allowing excessive deduction. Re-opening of the assessment was based on audit objection pointing out error

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SWARAJ ENGINES LTD MOHALI

ITA/266/2016HC Punjab & Haryana03 Feb 2020

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

HRY WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF IT

ITA/526/2005HC Punjab & Haryana20 Nov 2025

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 10(29)Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

2. The appellant through instant appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘1961 Act) is seeking setting aside of PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.11.26 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA-526-2005 and ITA-527-2005 -2- order dated 17.05.2005 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short ‘ITAT

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. M/S SUPERTECH FORGINGS PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/101/2022HC Punjab & Haryana05 Sept 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Reassessment proceedings were initiated under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent-assessee had made bogus purchases of Rs.4.26 crores by inflating the expenses and thereby suppressed the profits by Rs.4.26 crores for the AY 2010-2011. 4. The bogus purchases were reflected by the statements of Sh. Madan Lal Pahuja and Jatinder Kumar before the Investigating