Search: reassessment | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

6,688 results for “reassessment”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,438 Mumbai1,392 Jaipur454 Ahmedabad435 Bangalore413 Chennai342 Kolkata333 Pune248 Hyderabad221 Indore130 Raipur124 Chandigarh122 Rajkot122 Surat99 Cuttack87 Cochin76 Amritsar70 Agra64 Ranchi63 Lucknow53 Patna50 Nagpur49 Guwahati49 Dehradun41 Karnataka41 Visakhapatnam36 Allahabad29 SC24 Telangana21 Jodhpur16 Panaji11 Jabalpur11 Calcutta6 Varanasi5 Orissa4 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Rajasthan1 Uttarakhand1 J&K1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Kerala1 Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 250110 Section 14888 Section 14774 Addition to Income64 Section 143(3)62 Penalty45 Section 271(1)(c)34 Reassessment29 Disallowance23 Section 69

SMT. RASHMI JALAN,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 326/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 274

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied

MERCY EDUCATION TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(6), CHENNAI

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

Showing 1–20 of 6,688 · Page 1 of 335

...

20

ITA 2231/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed

ITAT Chennai

29 Jan 2026

AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2231/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Mercy Education Trust, The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Sree Gokulam Towers, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 19(6), Arcot Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. Pan: Aactm 6190M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Rajakumar, Addl.CIT

Section 10Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(2)(e)Section 273B

reassessing in the present penalty proceedings which has arisen from the reassessment order. In support of his contention the Ld.AR

KUMARSWAMY GANGASHARAISH KALLUR ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1391/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271BSection 44A

penalty under section 271B of the Act. However, during the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO has not initiated penalty

MAHESH M. GANDHI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 20(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2976/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2976/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Mahesh M. Gandhi, Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ 303/304, Sholay Income Tax – 20(2), V. Apartments, Mumbai. Raheja Complex, Seven Bungalows, Versova, Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 061. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpg3545P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.D. JimuliaFor Respondent: Shri Saurabhkumar Rai,DR

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

SHRI S KRISHNA PRASAD ,BALLARI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

ITA 1172/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

JAYSHREE CHANDRASINGH KABALI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 27 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the stay petitions of the assessee are dismissed and both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7225/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram K., Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271ASection 69

penalty imposed thereafter, in respect of reassessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 and penalty order u/s. 271AAC(1). Demand raised

JAYSHREE CHANDRASINGH KABALI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 27 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the stay petitions of the assessee are dismissed and both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7226/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram K., Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271ASection 69

penalty imposed thereafter, in respect of reassessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 and penalty order u/s. 271AAC(1). Demand raised

SHRI SHANKAR SINGH SHERAWAT,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 230/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (JCIT)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80C

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

ZAKI AHMED FAROOQUI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 849/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)

Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

SHRI KAILASH CHAND JAT,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80C

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

DILIP KUMAR ARORA,AJMER vs. ITO, AJMER

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

ITA 658/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Poonum Rai (DCIT)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

KAILASH CHAND BANGUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, KISHANGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 859/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)

Section 133ASection 271BSection 44A

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

KAILASH CHAND BANGUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, KISHANGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 858/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta (JCIT)

Section 133ASection 271BSection 44A

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S TRIAD RESORTS AND HOTELS PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3324/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(1)(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S VERDE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD , BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3325/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Dr. C.P. Ramaswami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

NARAYAN HEIGHTS & TOWERS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1033/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

reassessment in pursuance of which penalty is levied, cannot be the subject matter of penalty proceedings. The assessment or reassessment

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7248/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment initiated penalty proceedings under Sec. 271(1)(c) in respect of „furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income‟ by the assessee

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7249/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment initiated penalty proceedings under Sec. 271(1)(c) in respect of „furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income‟ by the assessee

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7245/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment initiated penalty proceedings under Sec. 271(1)(c) in respect of „furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income‟ by the assessee

DCIT 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7246/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 7245 To 7249/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08 To 2011-12) Dcit-3(3)(1), M/S Reliance General Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Insurance Company Ltd. बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 570, Rectifier House, Naigum Mumbai-400 020 Cross Road, Next To Royal Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400 031 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcr6747B (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

reassessment initiated penalty proceedings under Sec. 271(1)(c) in respect of „furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income‟ by the assessee