ITO, WARD-1, GUDIVADA vs. RAJESH KAKARALA, BAPULAPADU

ITA 447/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 August 2026AY 2016-175 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the High Court's judgment quashing the reassessment notice in the assessee's own case is binding on lower authorities. Therefore, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which quashed reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148. The CIT(A) had relied on a High Court judgment that quashed similar notices. The Revenue argued that subsequent amendments and pending Supreme Court cases should be considered.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 were valid, given a binding High Court judgment and subsequent statutory amendments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Pronounced: 31.08.2026

PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :

This appeal is by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 27.02.2026 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], 1

ITA 447/VIZ/2026 Rajesh Kakarala National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”) vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1086625426(1) dated 27.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →