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.

4 results for “reassessment”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi397Mumbai388Bangalore109Chennai103Karnataka94Kolkata58Jaipur48Hyderabad47Ahmedabad28Telangana25Lucknow22Chandigarh21Panaji11SC10Cochin9Surat9Pune9Nagpur9Rajkot6Jodhpur6Cuttack4Raipur4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Patna3Rajasthan2Orissa2Ranchi2Agra2Indore1Punjab & Haryana1Guwahati1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 1485Section 143(3)4Section 1473Addition to Income3Limitation/Time-bar2

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

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