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.

16 results for “reassessment”+ Section 27clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,577Mumbai2,194Bangalore846Chennai738Kolkata414Hyderabad409Jaipur393Ahmedabad378Chandigarh202Pune174Raipur136Rajkot104Indore102Surat95Amritsar89Patna72Lucknow59Visakhapatnam53Agra48Nagpur44Guwahati42Cochin41Allahabad37Dehradun27Cuttack26Ranchi26SC25Jodhpur18Karnataka18Panaji16Telangana16Orissa11Jabalpur9Calcutta7Rajasthan4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Kerala3K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1J&K1Uttarakhand1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 1486Section 10A5Section 54F5Section 143(3)4Section 158B4Section 1473Search & Seizure3Section 65(1)2Section 2602House Property

Mr. Vasamsetty Veera Venkata Satyanarayana vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1

The appeal is allowed and the order passed

ITTA/14/2025HC Telangana19 Mar 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 130Section 154Section 27Section 27(2)

27. Refund proceedings are in the CUSTA NO. 14 OF 2025 REPORTABLE Page 47 of 50 nature of execution for refunding the amount, it is not assessment or reassessment proceedings at all. Further, while processing a refund application, reassessment is not permitted nor conditions of exemption can be adjudicated and reassessment is permitted only under Section

COMMR OF INCOME TAX [TDS], HYDERABAD vs. M/S JAYADARSHINI HOUSING PVT LTD., HYDERABAD

Appeals are hereby dismissed by

2
Deduction2
Reassessment2
ITTA/65/2014HC Telangana26 Mar 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 260

reassessed. To confer jurisdiction under Section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied firstly the Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that income profits or gains 22 chargeable to income- tax have escaped assessment, and secondly he must also have reason to believe that such escapement has occurred by reason of either (i) omission or failure

Commissioner of Income Tax- IT and TP vs. M/s. Louis Berger International Inc.,

ITTA/108/2022HC Telangana25 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 17(5) of the Act. 4. Post the BoE being reassessed, the appellant preferred first appeals before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The first appellate authority by a common order disposed of 27

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

ITTA/94/2022HC Telangana24 Aug 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 17(5) of the Act. 4. Post the BoE being reassessed, the appellant preferred first appeals before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The first appellate authority by a common order disposed of 27

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

27. The aforesaid letter dated 20.03.95 which was written by DDIT (Inv.) to Mr. K.M. Verma, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (AO) in most indubitable way dictated him to initiate reassessment proceedings. In our view, this letter in unequivocal 30 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters terms the DDIT (Inv.) has exceeded its general power of superintendence and influenced

The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-4 vs. Sri. Krishna Chigullapally

ITTA/40/2022HC Telangana15 Jun 2023

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

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

27 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS-3) 2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'B' BLOCK BMTC BUILDING K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, AGA) AND: M/s. SONY INDIA PVT. LTD. NO.30, 2ND AND 5TH FLOOR JNR CITY CENTRE RAJA RAM MOHAN ROY ROAD SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI

M/S NMDC LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

ITTA/23/2018HC Telangana04 Jun 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

For Appellant: Mr.Ashish Gautam, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate
Section 12(1)Section 12(1)(C)Section 19(1)

27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty allegedly inflicted by the appellant- wife. Subsequently, the appellant-wife filed Misc. Case No. 155 of 2008 in the same suit under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking interim maintenance for herself and the minor son. The Trial Court, by order

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Sri Krishna Drugs Ltd.,

ITTA/166/2006HC Telangana16 Nov 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 147Section 147(1)

27,76,045/- as mesne profit towards arrears of rent. The decree for mesne profits/damages against the tenant-defendant was @ `.75,000/- per month from the date of filing of suit to the date of vacation, with costs. 3. The AO reopened the assessment for assessment years 1992-93 to 1998-99 alleging that the assessee knew that higher amount

Rachit V Shah vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-7

ITTA/85/2023HC Telangana25 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 153C

Section 148 and which would necessarily be guided by the judgments of Rajeev Bansal and Ram Balram. 29. The concerned AOs shall consequently pass a reasoned and speaking order dealing with the impact of the judgments referred to above upon the impugned reassessment notices and in the manner indicated in paras 27

The Commissioner of Income Tax(Central) vs. M/s.Madhu Enterprises

ITTA/127/2025HC Telangana12 Feb 2025

Bench: The Learned

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 260ASection 54F

27, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi [the new asset]. 5. On 17.12.2012, a search and seizure operation was carried out under Section 132 of the Act on persons constituting the FIITJEE Group. The Assessee was also one of the persons searched. Thereafter, the AO issued a notice dated 13.08.2013 under Section 153A of the Act and during the ensuing proceedings, examined

M/s. Kausalya Shelters Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/274/2022HC Telangana02 Feb 2023

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 34

27, 2020. Digitally Signed By:DHARMENDER SINGH Signing Date:30.05.2023 18:35:47 Signature Not Verified OMP(COMM) 274/2022 Page 40 of 76 65. It is his case that immediately on the termination of the sub-lease deed, proviso (c) to Clause 8 stood attracted, which clearly stipulated that in the event, respondent terminated the sub-lease deed under Clause

Pinna Nageswara RAo, vs. Commissioner of Income tax, IV (A.P)

ITTA/380/2010HC Telangana17 Dec 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

PRL COMMR OF INCOME TAX-7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S SRI VENKATESWARA PADMAVATHI COMPAY, KHAMMAM DIST

ITTA/11/2017HC Telangana24 Mar 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

Kuchipudi Krishna Kishore vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2[1],

ITTA/293/2007HC Telangana03 May 2024

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

Commissioner of Income Tax -II, vs. M/S Kasila Farms Ltd.,

ITTA/65/2007HC Telangana25 Sept 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. RASA AGROTECH PRIVATE LTD.

Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the

ITTA/453/2012HC Telangana18 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 113Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 158BSection 260A

Section 260A of the Act. Therefore, the last date for filing the appeals was 26th October 2007. Keeping that view if the actual dates for filing of the two appeals are taken into consideration then the actual delay works out to far more than what is claimed by the Revenue. As far as ITA No. 453 of 2012 is concerned