Search: reassessment | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

70 results for “reassessment”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,337 Delhi2,080 Chennai773 Ahmedabad612 Kolkata545 Jaipur517 Hyderabad434 Bangalore399 Pune324 Chandigarh289 Rajkot217 Raipur197 Indore194 Surat183 Visakhapatnam149 Amritsar142 Patna108 Cochin104 Nagpur100 Guwahati89 Agra85 Lucknow72 Ranchi70 Cuttack61 Dehradun51 Jodhpur48 Allahabad37 Panaji27 Jabalpur12 Varanasi9

Key Topics

Section 148131 Section 14777 Addition to Income61 Section 153D44 Section 143(3)44 Reassessment44 Section 153A41 Limitation/Time-bar29 Section 15127 Search & Seizure

BADRINATH SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,ADITYAPUR, WEST SINGHBHUM vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE 1 JSR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/RAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

148", "Section 131", "Section 145(3)", "Section 143(3)", "Section 142(1)", "Section 144" ], "issues": "1. Whether the reassessment proceedings

INCOME TAX OFFICER, RANCHI, JHARKHAND vs. AMBA CARBONISATION PVT. LTD., RANCHI, JHARKHAND

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

26

Reopening of Assessment19

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 61/RAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.61/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ito, Ranchi………..…………….…….…...................................……….……Appellant Vs. Amba Carbonisation Pvt. Ltd ……....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent 21, Ashok Bhawan, Kali Asthan Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand. [Pan: Aadca7460J] Appearances By: Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 15.01.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act & Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Special Smokeless Coal/Coke. The Assessee Also Derives Income By Way Of Interest On Bank Deposits. As Per Information Available With The Income-Tax Department, It Was Noticed That The Assessee’S Bank Accounts Reflected Substantial Cash Deposits, Which Were Allegedly Withdrawn Immediately Through Rtgs/Neft Transactions. It Was Further Observed That There Existed A Difference Between The Turnover Disclosed By The Assessee In The Return Of Income & The Total Credits Appearing In The Bank Accounts. On The Basis Of The Above Information, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Initiated Reassessment Proceedings By Issuing A Notice Under Section 148 Of The

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 270ASection 273B

reassessment based on the material available on record and passed the assessment order dated 30.03.2022 under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act, making an addition of ₹13,64,83,677/- under section 69A of the Act, treating the same as unexplained money. A perusal of the assessment records reveals that two notices under section 148

MARS MERCANTILES PVT.LTD.,DHANBAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD, DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 73/RAN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pranab Kr. Koley, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment or recomputation, the Assessing Officer has to serve on the assessee a notice under sub-section (1) of section 148

MISRILALL JAIN & SONS,SINGHBHUM WEST vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 468/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.468/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Misrilall Jain & Sons….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M. D. House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aabfm2851Q] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 30.07.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 250

reassessment proceedings on the ground that the notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Act was confined only to the alleged escapement of income amounting to ₹1,32,63,010. It is an undisputed fact that the said amount was duly disclosed by the assessee in the return of income filed in response to the notice under section 148

HIRALAL AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 288/RAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) where appeal of the assessee was dismissed sustaining the order of the AO.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

Section 148 was issued on 11.08.2017 for reopening the completed assessment. During the reassessment proceedings, a certified copy of the reasons

SMITA,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD 3(4),, CHAIBASA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

section 148 of the Act was issued on the ground that the assessee had sold a flat for a consideration of ₹30 lakhs, whereas the stamp duty value as per State valuation authority was ₹46.50 lakhs, resulting in alleged escapement of income chargeable to tax.The Assessing Officer completed reassessment

KROSS LIMITED,JAMSHEDPUR vs. PCIT, RANCHI, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 34/RAN/2022[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jun 2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

148(2). This, however, will not obviate the bar of limitation under section 263(2). The invocation of the jurisdiction under section 263(2) was barred by limitation”. 9. In the instant case before us also the issue on which the ld. PCIT proposed the revision of reassessment

BISHNU TRANSPORT COMPANY,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, DHANBAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 401/RAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151oSection 68

reassessment proceedings on the ground that the approval obtained under section 151 of the Act for issuance of notice under section 148

KULDIP SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RAN/2025[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.180/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kuldip Singh…………………….……….……...................……….……Appellant The Avenue Vishnupuri Marg, Upper Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, Ranchi- 834001. [Pan: Agjps6921P] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-1, Ranchi…...…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 10, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 06.03.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

section 148 of the Act dated 22.11.2019 is barred by limitation. Consequently, the assessment framed pursuant thereto is void ab initio. Accordingly, we quash the reassessment

MANISH AGARWAL,BALLYGUNGE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 16/RAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.16/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 201-12 Manish Agarwal……….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 35A, Tirumala Apartment, Ballygunge Park, Kol- 700019. [Pan: Acdpa1176E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi......…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sunit Dasgupta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 28.11.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted In The Case Of The Assessee Group On 23.10.2019. Pursuant To The Said Search, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued A Notice Under Section 153A Of The Act Calling Upon The Assessee To File Its Return Of Income For Six Assessment Years Preceding The Year Of Search. In Response To The Notice Under Section 153A, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2011–12, Declaring A Total Income Of ₹6,95,180/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Several Statutory Notices Were Issued To The Assessee, Which

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

148, Section 149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are I.T.A. No.16/Ran/2024 Manish Agarwal requisitioned under section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall-- (a) issue notice to such person requiring

ABHISHEK GOURASARIA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT , JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, consequential assessment order also stands quashed

ITA 43/RAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayabhishek Gourasaria, A.C.I.T., 118, Flat No. 2B, Surabhi Apartment, K Jamshedpur Vs. Road, Bistupur, Jamshedpur-831001. Pan No. Adwpg 2149 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred

SARYU DEVI,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/RAN/2025[20-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.251/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Saryu Devi…..………...…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant W/O Hira Nath Singh, Neori, Vikas, Sadar Ranchi, Jharkhand- 835217. [Pan: Geppd1201D] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi…..….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri M. K. Choudhury, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 22, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 10.06.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Lady, Residing In A Village Area. She Had Not Filed Any Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2021–22 As, According To Her, She Had No Taxable Income. The Assessee Was Not Registered On The Income-Tax E-Filing Portal During The Relevant Period. Her E-Filing Registration Was Done For The First Time On 09.03.2025. The Ao Received Information Through The Risk Management Strategy (Rms) That The Assessee Had Purchased Immovable Property For A Consideration Of ₹30,70,000. Based On This Information, Proceedings Under Section 147 Of The Act Were Initiated After Following

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 69A

Section 148 of the act was served upon the assessee and without serving notice assumption of jurisdiction is bad in law as assessee was not registered on the income-tax portal at the relevant time; hence, service through electronic mode was impossible and no notice was served by email, by speed post, or by personal delivery. Therefore, the reassessment

SUBIR MANDAL,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), CHAIBASA, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 188/RAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No. 188/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Subir Mandal,….…………………………………..Appellant 61, Parsudih, Pramathanagar, Jamshedpur-831001, Jharkhand [Pan:Anfpm1717N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-3(4), Chaibasa, 47, Ch Area, Jamshedpur-831001, Jharkhand Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 21, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

reassessment proceeding under section 148. However, notice u/s 148 and subsequent notices under section 142(1) could not be acted

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 56/RAN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

148 though delayed, has been taken into account, it is incumbent upon the Ld. AO to issue a notice u/s. 143(2) which otherwise vitiates the entire assessment proceedings. Requirement of issuing notice u/s. 143(2) cannot be dispensed with. Accordingly, the reassessment proceedings undertaken by the Ld. AO and the impugned reassessment order passed thereafter are liable

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 202/RAN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

148 though delayed, has been taken into account, it is incumbent upon the Ld. AO to issue a notice u/s. 143(2) which otherwise vitiates the entire assessment proceedings. Requirement of issuing notice u/s. 143(2) cannot be dispensed with. Accordingly, the reassessment proceedings undertaken by the Ld. AO and the impugned reassessment order passed thereafter are liable

ANWESH KUMAR CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 207/RAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi19 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Anwesh Kumar Chakraborty, Assessing Officer, Flat No. 04, Ashabori Apartment, 11/1 Jamshedpur. Vs. Kolupara Lane, Dhakuria, Kolkata-700031 (West Bengal) Pan No. Aiqpc 6936 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 80D

Sections 148 to 153, assessee or reassess such income. But in this case, there has been no income which has escaped

LAXMI HARD COKE MFG CO.,DHANBAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1), DHANBAD

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 101/RAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153ASection 153BSection 153C

reassessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Act of 1961. That was not done within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 153B of the Act of 1961. The respondent-authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under Section 153C of the Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the provisions contained

LUXMI HARD COKE MFG. CO,,DHANBAD vs. ITO WARD-1(1), DHANBAD

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 102/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153ASection 153BSection 153C

reassessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Act of 1961. That was not done within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 153B of the Act of 1961. The respondent-authority was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under Section 153C of the Act of 1961 would be barred by limitation, therefore, recourse was taken to the provisions contained

ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO 1(1), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/RAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.229/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arvind Kumar Mishra… ….…………….……...................……….……Appellant 22/20, Mishra Niwas, Kharangajhar, Near Hanumanmandir Road Telco, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831004. [Pan: Agdpm2983R] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1)…………………...…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 04, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 02.06.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69C

148, the assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of ₹2,34,920 from business, with gross receipts of ₹1,06,82,530. Thereafter, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued and the assessment was completed I.T.A. No.229/Ran/2024 Arvind Kumar Mishra under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act. During the assessment proceedings

SRI GAURAV PALRIWAL,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-1(3), RANCHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 46/RAN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayit(Ss)A No. 10 & 11/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2012-13 & 2013-14) Sri Vishal Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Ishatvam, Flat No. 801, 8Th Floor, Central Circle-1 Vs. Kanke Road, Ranchi-834008. Ranchi. Pan No. Ahnpp 0913 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 12/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2012-13) Sri Gaurav Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Flat No. 701, 7Th Floor, Ishatvam, Central Circle-1 Vs. Behind Kanke Petrol Pump, Kanke Ranchi. Road, Ranchi-834008. Pan No. Aiapp 8110 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 13/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Sri Saurav Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Block No. 1, Flat No. 3C, Space Town Central Circle-1 Vs. Vip Road, Raghunathpur, Kolkata. Ranchi. Pan No. Atcpp 9277 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 14/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Smt. Priti Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Flat No. 701, 7Th Floor, Ishatvam, Central Circle-1 Vs. Behind Kanke Petrol Pump, Kanke Ranchi. Road, Ranchi-834008. Pan No. Amdpp 5673 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue It(Ss)A No. 15/Ran/2023 (Assessment Year-2013-14) Smt. Renu Palriwal, A.C.I.T., Block No. 1, Flat No. 3C, Space Town Central Circle-1 Vs. Vip Road, Raghunathpur, Ranchi. Kolkata-700052 Pan No. Ajlpp 9129 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 148Section 151Section 153A

148 has been initiated on 30/03/2019. The AU categorically mentions states that information was received from the investigation unit subsequent to the search operation against the assessee and his family. As such, once the search has conducted place, reassessment if any, could only have been done by invoking section