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 35(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,180Mumbai1,836Chennai651Bangalore633Jaipur516Ahmedabad423Hyderabad352Kolkata334Raipur321Chandigarh254Pune197Indore184Surat163Rajkot126Visakhapatnam124Amritsar124Cochin100Patna76Karnataka73Cuttack70Guwahati58Nagpur54Lucknow50Telangana47Agra38Ranchi36Dehradun31SC26Jodhpur23Allahabad22Orissa9Panaji8Calcutta6Jabalpur5Rajasthan5Kerala5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Varanasi3Uttarakhand1Madhya Pradesh1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 1474Section 1483Addition to Income3Section 65(1)2Section 173(1)2

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS)

ITA/7/2020HC Rajasthan17 Mar 2021

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

35 additional or excess grants. No such procedure has been followed in the present case, evidently because the provisions of Article 205 are inapplicable for an ex- post facto legislative sanction of the expenditure, illegally incurred by the State Government earlier, in providing various amenities to the former Chief Ministers. 58. Article 206, which relates to vote on account, votes

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI MADAN MOHAN GUPTA

ITA/19/2024HC Rajasthan14 Aug 2025

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT

Section 147Section 148Section 263

35:07 ITA 1482/2018 & ITA 19/2024 Page 2 of 5 dated 12 February 2024 on the following question of law:- “A. Whether Ld. ITAT has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case in not appreciating Explanation 3 of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and whether the same would empower the Assessing Officer to assess

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PALSANA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED

ITA/26/2022HC Rajasthan15 Jan 2025

Bench: INDERJEET SINGH,VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Section 39(1)Section 62(1)Section 65(1)Section 69(1)

35  the issue involved in these petitions are covered by the authority in State of Punjab & Others Vs. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd7 (hereinafter referred to as the Nokia India Case).  mobile charger is not an integral part of the mobile phone to treat among ‘composite goods’ because merely making a composite package of cell phone, charger shall not make

MAMTA GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/130/2019HC Rajasthan28 Jul 2022

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA

3 (2004) 10 SCC 627 4 2009 (8) SCC 582 Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:05.10.2025 11:29:12 Signature Not Verified LA.APP. 59/2007 & connected Page 88 of 171 18.4 Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the market value for the acquired land of village, Kilokari cannot be treated differently from the adjacent land of posh colonies such

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JODHPUR vs. GAJ SINGH

ITA/87/2017HC Rajasthan08 Nov 2019

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Section 173(1)

3. On the basis of the pleading of the parties, the Tribunal, framed the issues and recorded the evidence. The injured claimant examined herself as PW1, Sudhakanth (PW2), Anjaneya (PW3), Chandan (PW4), Ananditha (PW5) and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P30 respectively. The respondents examined KM Prakash (RW1) and got marked documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R9 on their behalf. The Tribunal