BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI 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.

6 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 145(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai484Delhi402Jaipur132Bangalore118Ahmedabad103Chandigarh73Raipur68Chennai64Kolkata63Rajkot54Surat42Pune32Hyderabad31Lucknow30Telangana26Agra20Nagpur19Jodhpur15Patna11Indore10Cuttack10Allahabad10Amritsar8Cochin7Visakhapatnam6Guwahati5Orissa2Panaji2SC1Varanasi1Dehradun1Gauhati1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 14825Section 143(3)20Section 14711Section 142(1)5Section 325Depreciation5Reopening of Assessment5Section 148A4

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: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Sept 2025AY 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

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2400/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
23 Aug 2022
AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

2. The Ld. CIT(A)‟s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. 4. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2401/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

2. The Ld. CIT(A)‟s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. 4. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2402/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

2. The Ld. CIT(A)‟s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. 4. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2478/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

2. The Ld. CIT(A)‟s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. 4. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that

VIZAG SEAPORT P.LTD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A) 14, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2479/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri PJ Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

2. The Ld. CIT(A)‟s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be set aside. 3. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. 4. The appellant prays that the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that