BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

67 results for “reassessment”+ Section 41(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai853Delhi716Chennai376Bangalore243Jaipur236Ahmedabad217Hyderabad207Chandigarh162Kolkata122Raipur94Pune88Rajkot67Indore66Amritsar65Surat62Nagpur49Guwahati46Cochin38Allahabad34Patna34Agra29Visakhapatnam25Lucknow25Jodhpur24Dehradun12Cuttack5Ranchi2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 14737Section 14831Addition to Income28Section 143(3)25Section 26318Section 25015Deduction14Section 6913Section 271(1)(c)10Section 153D

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 289/RJT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 177/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

10
Limitation/Time-bar10
Reopening of Assessment7

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 288/RJT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT vs. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD., RJAKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 286/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 291/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 13/RJT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. CLASSIC NETWORK PVT. LTD., RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 287/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 275/RJT/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1 RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 176/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 274/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 273/RJT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3/RJT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

M/S. CLASSIC NETWORK LIMITED,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 290/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

CLASSIC NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 178/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

4. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, in lead case in ITA 288/Rjt/2022 for Assessment Year 2013-14, are as follows: “1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in upholding the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in estimating suppressed sales

SMT RAMILABE RAMJI BHADRA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD 1 (2), JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 17/RJT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 17/Rjt/2018 अपील Assessment Year : 2007-08 Ramila R. Bhadra, C/O. Laxmi Enterprise, Vs The Income-Tax Officer, C-2-35/2, Gidc, Shankar Tekri, Ward 1(2), Udhyog Nagar, Jamnagar Jamnagar-361004 Pan : Afwpb 3443 F अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/04/2023 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Ms. Madhumita Roy:-

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 41(1)

reassessing the books of accounts, purchase vouchers etc. on 21.06.2013. The consequential assessment was completed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act determining total income at Rs.50,70,547/- on 26.03.2015 which was in turn confirmed by the First Appellate Authority on 14.08.2017. Hence, the instant appeal before us. 3. The case of the assessee is this that

THE ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT vs. SHRI VICKY BALKRISHNA MEHTA, RAJKOT

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 130/RJT/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal"नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Vicky Balkrishna Mehta, Income-Tax, 7Th Floor, Mansrovar Central Circle-2, Apartment, Royal Park, Rajkot Kalawad Road, Rajkot Pan : Agqpm 6495 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 22.01.2020 Passed U/S 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2004-05. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(c)Section 149(3)Section 250(6)

41. With the assistance of learned representatives who have gone through the decision of learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has held that issues under section 148 in respect all the above-mentioned years a being beyond the limitation prescribed under the pre-amended section 149 of the Act are bad in law and hence consequential assessment framed pursuant

SMT. PRATIMABEN V. RAJA,,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTL. TAXN., RAJKOT

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 51/RJT/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 148Section 2(30)Section 68Section 69

4. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee is a non- resident as defined under Section 2(30) of the Act and the “non-resident” status of the assessee has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer. Further, the assessee submitted that the entire funds had come from his son’s overseas accounts and both the assessee

SHRI VINODKUMAR HIRALAL RAJA,,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTL. TAXN., RAJKOT

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 50/RJT/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot20 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 148Section 2(30)Section 68Section 69

4. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee is a non- resident as defined under Section 2(30) of the Act and the “non-resident” status of the assessee has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer. Further, the assessee submitted that the entire funds had come from his son’s overseas accounts and both the assessee

SHRI RAJESHKUMAR MAHESHBHAI MANEK,ANJAR KUTCH vs. THE ITO WARD-2, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, additional legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal & Shri Brijesh ParekhFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act. The facts relating to reopening the assessment under section 147/148 were there before the assessing officer.We note that it is purely a legal issue and all facts are already on record which goes to the root of the matter and no further inquiry is required for deciding the same, as all facts

SHIV EXTRUSION,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

reassessment initiated under the extended period of limitation prescribed by Section 149(1)(b) despite the final assessed income falling below the mandatory threshold of Rupees fifty lakhs or more. -The AD relied on the entire alleged turnover of Rs. 1,17,14,220/- to invoke Section 149(1)(b). The NFAC itself conceded the settled legal position that only