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.

2 results for “reassessment”+ Section 145(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai336Delhi185Jaipur147Ahmedabad98Chandigarh86Chennai84Raipur72Bangalore68Kolkata59Rajkot55Agra36Pune33Hyderabad30Surat26Jodhpur19Lucknow19Nagpur18Cuttack16Allahabad13Indore11Patna9SC7Amritsar6Cochin5Guwahati4Dehradun2Visakhapatnam2Ranchi1Panaji1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 1485Section 148A4Section 2632Addition to Income2

DEVI SEA FOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 316/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 263

1. The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT),\nVisakhapatnam-1 erred in law and on facts in invoking the provisions of\nSection 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and holding that the assessment\norder passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 25.09.2022 is\nerroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.\n2. The impugned order passed

NANDIGAM VEERABRAHMAM,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 271/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
03 Sept 2025
AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 148A

Section 147 2 N. Veerabrahmam r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) dated 31.01.2024 for A.Y. 2018-19. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us: “1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also