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.

11 results for “reassessment”+ Section 264clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi175Mumbai152Chennai103Hyderabad55Jaipur46Bangalore35Kolkata33Chandigarh28Ahmedabad22Raipur19Pune14Lucknow13Surat11Indore11Patna11Panaji10Cochin9Rajkot6Nagpur6Guwahati5Cuttack4Jodhpur3Agra3Amritsar2Ranchi2Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)12Addition to Income10Business Income9Survey u/s 133A8Section 1477Cash Deposit7Demonetization7Section 1486Section 2635Section 10A

NYA INTERNATIONAL,SURAT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 57/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.57/Srt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Nya International, Vs. The Pcit-1, Unit No.360, Plot No.239, Sez, Gidc Surat. Sachin, Suarat – 394230. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfn1681M

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

reassessment proceedings were initiated have not been fulfilled and therefore the ld. PCIT has rightly exercised his jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act. 16. About claim of deduction under section 10AA of the Act to the tune of Rs.87,21,44,414/-, the Ld. DR pointed out that the assessment order was framed on dated

M/S. MAC INDUSTRIES,,VALSAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6,, VAPI

3
Section 148A3
Section 402

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

ITA 1036/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1036/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2009-10) M/S. Mac Industries, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Plot No.1, 2407/2, Gidc, Sarigam, Ward-6, Vapi. Ta- Umbergaon, Valsad-396230. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefm2011M (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora - Ar Respondent By : Ms Anupama Singhla – Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora - ARFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla – Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

264 (Cal) submits that if any factual inquiry was necessary or any debatable question of law had to be decided, it could. not be made subject-matter of a prima facie adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) and issue which could. not have been dealt with as a prima facie adjustment under Section 143A(a) cannot be dealt with

DHIRUBHAI NANJIBHAI KACHCHADIA,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 581/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Dhirubhai Nanjibhai Kachchadia, I.T.O. Ward-2, B-9/83, Near Ambaji Temple, Vapi. Vs. Haria Hospital Road, Gidc, Vapi (Gujarat)-396395. Pan No. Acppk 1953 R Appellant/ Respondent Respondent/ Assessee

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 254(1)Section 50C(2)

264, in village Lajpor, Taluka –Choryasi, District Surat on 26/04/2010. The sale consideration of said land on the sale deed was shown at Rs. 95,60,600/-. The Assessing Officer on receipt of said information, noted that the assessee has not offered capital gain in the return of income. On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer made

DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA (P) LTD.,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.,2, SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 30/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA (P) LTD,SURAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 305/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA (P) LTD,SURAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 306/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT vs. M/S. DAGINA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., , SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 312/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRA CIR.2, SURAT vs. DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA PVT. LTD., SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 51/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA (P) LTD,SURAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 304/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

DAGINA JEWELLERS INDIA (P) LTD,SURAT vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 303/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

264 12,12,00,000 20. However, the assessing officer observed that as evidenced by the digital analysis of the data found and impounded, which is duly discussed in detail in the show cause notice dated 18.10.2019, the director of the assessee- company Shri Ramesh Ganna could not adduce proper explanation at the time of survey in respect of anomalies

JAYVADAN RUGHNATHWALA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 923/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.D.R
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

reassessment scheme, it is safely concluded that from 29th March 2022 the show-cause notice u/s 148A(b) should have been issued only by the National Faceless Assessment Centre ("NFAC") and not by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer ("JAO") Therefore, show cause notice issued by any authority other than NFAC is liable to be quashed. The reliance is placed