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.

7 results for “reassessment”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi390Mumbai380Bangalore104Karnataka93Chennai90Kolkata59Jaipur58Hyderabad49Cuttack40Ahmedabad35Visakhapatnam32Chandigarh31Telangana25Lucknow22Surat19Pune16Cochin15Panaji11Guwahati10Amritsar10SC10Nagpur9Agra8Raipur7Rajkot6Jodhpur6Allahabad4Indore4Patna3Orissa2Varanasi2Rajasthan2Ranchi2Punjab & Haryana1Calcutta1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 26310Section 153A10Section 1478Section 1487Section 143(3)6Addition to Income6Limitation/Time-bar4Section 143(1)2Section 143(2)2Section 10(38)

M/S. EXOTICS FATS EXIM,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), RAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 130/RPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.130/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Exotics Fats Exim 3Rd Floor, C/O. Dayalal Meghji & Co., Dm Plaza, Chhotapara, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aacfe1065H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

section 145(3), addition of Rs.1,40,260 is liable to be deleted. 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, ld. AO & Id. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing Rs.1,40,260 which is 25% of the alleged bogus purchases at Rs.5,61,050 considered by the ld. AO from M/s. Syndicate Corporation, Raipur; arbitrary/ baseless

2
Reassessment2
Disallowance2

SHREEMATI JASWANTI DEVI L/H OF LATE SHRI RANDHIR SINGH DAHIYA,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), BHILAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 13/RPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.13/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without fulfilling all mandatory conditions is bad in law and without jurisdiction. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming addition of Rs.24,79,290/- as unexplained cash deposit without considering facts and evidences in their

SATYA POWER AND ISPAT LTD.,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 52/RPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. Nos.51 & 52/Rpr/2021 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Satya Power & Ispat Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम First Floor, V R Plaza, Income-Tax, Vs. Link Road, Central Circle-2, Bilaspur-495001 (Cg) Raipur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 4472 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Amit Maloo Jain, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 30.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 29.09.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DRFor Respondent: 30.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

260 (Mad); CIT Vs. Kanubhai Engineers (P.) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 665 (Cal) for the proposition that an issue which is not the subject matter of the assessment order under revision could not be revised ITA Nos.51 & 52/RPR/2021 Satya Power and Ispat Ltd Vs. DCIT AY : 2012-13 & 2013-14 under Section 263 of the Act and the period

SATYA POWER AND ISPAT LTD.,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 51/RPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. Nos.51 & 52/Rpr/2021 अपील िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14) (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Satya Power & Ispat Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ बनाम बनाम बनाम First Floor, V R Plaza, Income-Tax, Vs. Link Road, Central Circle-2, Bilaspur-495001 (Cg) Raipur "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahcs 4472 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Amit Maloo Jain, Ca अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 30.07.2021 सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 29.09.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia - Am:

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DRFor Respondent: 30.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

260 (Mad); CIT Vs. Kanubhai Engineers (P.) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 665 (Cal) for the proposition that an issue which is not the subject matter of the assessment order under revision could not be revised ITA Nos.51 & 52/RPR/2021 Satya Power and Ispat Ltd Vs. DCIT AY : 2012-13 & 2013-14 under Section 263 of the Act and the period

SPIN PACKAGING LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of over aforesaid observations

ITA 165/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 165/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

260/- of agricultural income considering it as bogus,. The addition made by the A.O. and confirmed by CIT(A) is unjustified, unwarranted and uncalled for and deserves to be deleted. 4. The assessee reserves the right to add, amend or alter any grounds of appeal at any time of hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee

RAVI KUMAR KUMHAR,JANJGIR-CHAMPA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

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

ITA 36/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.36/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ravikumar Kumhar Ward No.02, Darri Road, Naila, Jangir-Champa-495668 Pan: Jfypk3987N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 114Section 147

260 where it was observed that though the Act does not given any power of dismissal, it is 6 Ravikumar Kumhar Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bilaspur axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a proceedings before it when the party who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore

SUBHASH MURARKA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 176/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.176/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Subhash Murarka C-1/85/186-R7, Swarnabhoomi, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pan: Aeqpm4578P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)

260: is reproduced below: "Now the Act does not give any power of dismissal. But it is axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a proceeding before it when the party But it is axiomatic that no who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power which