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.

7 results for “reassessment”+ Section 274clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi219Mumbai154Jaipur84Bangalore70Ahmedabad46Chennai45Chandigarh40Ranchi38Kolkata26Raipur26Patna23Hyderabad23Rajkot22Pune21Allahabad20Indore15Visakhapatnam8Cuttack8Nagpur8Surat7Guwahati7Lucknow7Jodhpur6Cochin4Agra4Amritsar3

Key Topics

Section 14810Section 1478Section 2504Section 143(3)3Section 234B3Section 271(1)(c)3Long Term Capital Gains3Penalty3Addition to Income3Section 274

RUCHIT DINESHBHAI DOSHI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 216/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Ruchit Dineshbhai Doshi, I.T.O., C-10, 5/6, Somakanji Estate-2, Opp- Ward-2(2)(1), Vs. Sanidev Mandir, Magdalla Bo, Surat. Surat-395007 (Gujarat) Pan No. Afxpd 4008 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

274 is not furnished. So far as merit of penalty is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee has indulged in transaction of penny stock of Shreya Chemicals earlier known as Dhvanil Chemicals Ltd. which was a penny stock as per information of DDIT (Inv), Ahmedabad. The Assessing Officer in penalty order, held 4 Ruchit Dineshbhai Doshi

2
Reopening of Assessment2
Unexplained Cash Credit2

DHAVAL INDRAVADAN GANDHI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2, BARDOLI

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

ITA 601/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shri Dhaval Indravadan Gandhi, Ito Ward-2, At & Post Areth, Tal Mandvi, Aayakar Bhavan, Janta Nagar Surat-394160. Vs. Society, Bardoli-394601. Pan No. Ajjpg 4246 J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Shaunak K. Zaveri, CA
Section 143(3)

274 of the Act. 4.0 That the appellant craves leave to add, to amend, modify, 4.0 That the appellant craves leave to add, to amend, modify, 4.0 That the appellant craves leave to add, to amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated here rescind, supplement or alter any of the grounds stated here rescind, supplement

VANMALIBHAI MULJIBHAI PATEL L/H RANJANBEN DEEPAKBHAI PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD 5, NAVSARI

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

ITA 345/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel, Vs. Ito, L/H Of Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel Ward - 5, 16, Shrinikunj Society, Ashabaug, Navsari Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abjpp3114G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)

274 of the Act was also separately initiated. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant raised various grounds of appeal before the CIT(A), which are at pages 2 of the appellate order. The CIT(A) reproduced the submission of the appellant, which is at pages

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 164/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
Section 147Section 250

reassessment proceedings, the digital image found and seized from\nthe premises of Shri Vikas Vimal Agrawal was confronted to the assessee. The\nimage lies in page 3 of the assessment order. The image shows a ledger account\nhaving total debits of Rs.50,00,000/- and credits of Rs.40,00,000/-. There was\nalso working of interest

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

ITA 136/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

reassessment proceedings, the digital image found and seized from\nthe premises of Shri Vikas Vimal Agrawal was confronted to the assessee. The\nimage lies in page 3 of the assessment order. The image shows a ledger account\nhaving total debits of Rs.50,00,000/- and credits of Rs.40,00,000/-. There was\nalso working of interest

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 163/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

reassessment proceedings, the digital image found and seized from\nthe premises of Shri Vikas Vimal Agrawal was confronted to the assessee. The\nimage lies in page 3 of the assessment order. The image shows a ledger account\nhaving total debits of Rs.50,00,000/- and credits of Rs.40,00,000/-. There was\nalso working of interest

KETAN NATVARLAL SHAH,VAPI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 894/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year:2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 274

reassessment order dated 17.05.2022 the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority which was decided by Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 4. Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal: 1. On the facts