147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT

225 ITR 496High Court1997#1814 most cited

What is 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT authority for?

Under the amended Section 147, a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 is illegal if it is served more than four years after the end of the relevant assessment year, particularly when the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3), due to the proviso to Section 147.

63

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT · Rakesh Aggarwal 225 ITR 496 · Section 147 reassessment · Section 148 notice · amended Section 147 · proviso to Section 147 · four year limitation · original assessment Section 143(3) · reassessment legality · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 11(4)section 4asection 147(b)section 31(3)section 164(2)section 11(6)advancement of general public utilitysection 153(3)section 139(3)section 44bbsection 44b

Judgments citing 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. ACIT, Circle-II, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 857/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupruam

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 856/CHNY/2020[202-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

The Villupuram District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 855/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

The Villupuram District Central Coopertative Bank Ltd., Villupuram vs. DCIT, Villupuram Circle, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 854/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

The Cuddalore District Central Co-Op Bank Ltd., Cuddalore vs. DCIT Cuddalore Circle, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2645/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.B. Som, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

M/S. Crystal Granite and Marble Private Limited, Ramanagaram vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 405/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K, JCIT (DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…another person or thing"; "to replace (an atom or group in a molecule) with (another atom or group)"; or "a person or thing that serves in place of another, such as a player in a game who takes the place of an injured colleague”. (iv). Rakesh Aggarwal [1997] 225 ITR 496/[1996] 87 Taxman 306, “the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to section 147 notice for reassessment under section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new section 147 and where the original assessment had been made under section 143(3), then in view of the proviso to section 147 the notice under section 148 would b…

M/S Crown Real Estate Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-1(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai

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

ITA 353/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

DCIT, CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S.Equitas Holdings Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 867/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CITFor Respondent: Shri T. Banusekar, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued more than four years after the end of the relevant assessment year. The same…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S Eqitasholfings Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 866/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CITFor Respondent: Shri T. Banusekar, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued more than four years after the end of the relevant assessment year. The same…

Sundaram Fasteners Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 74/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40Section 43Section 43B

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

DCIT, Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai vs. Sundaram Fasteners Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 317/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40Section 43Section 43B

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

M/S Macmillan Publishers India Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Circle 4 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 2784/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2784/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Macmillan Publishers India The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., V. Corporate Circle 4(1), No.21, Patullos Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 002. Pan: Aafcm 5564R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.09.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai In Ita No.69/18- 19 Dated 16.07.2019. The Re-Assessment Was Framed By The Acit, Company Circle 4(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2011-12 U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 30.12.2018. I.T.A. No.2784/Chny/2019 2 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Confirming The Action Of Ao In Reopening Of Assessment U/S.147 R.W.S 148 Of The Act Even Though There Is No Failure On The Part Of The Assessee To Disclose Fully & Truly The Material Fact Necessary For Its Assessment For The Relevant Assessment Year & The Original Assessment Was Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act. For This, Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds Regarding Reopening Which Are Exhaustive & Argumentative, Hence Need Not To Be Reproduced.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2972/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in.accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

ACIT, Cuddalore Circle, Cuddalore vs. M/S. the Cuddalore District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 703/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

Lokesh Talanki, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 261/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Waghale CAFor Respondent: Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman Addln CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 54F

…e power to reopen assessment is much wider under the amended provision and can be exercised even after the assessed has disclosed fully and truly all the material facts. To similar view were the conclusions of this court in Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 496. It is to be noted at this juncture that the twin conditions must be fulfillled if the case is one which is covered by the proviso to Section 147 operative with effect from April v, 1989." (emphasis supplied by us). 32. It is evident from the afore-extracted position of the decision that it is not an authority for the proposition that a mere chan…

Late Smt. Geetha Vasan Rep by Legal Heir Shri M.G.Vasan, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 16(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2666/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. ARV. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:2666/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2008 - 2009 (Late) Smt. Geetha Vasan, The Income Tax Officer, Rep. By Legal Heir Shri M.G. Vasan, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward -16(3), Shri M. G. Vasan, Chennai – 600 034. Old No.157, New No.48, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN : AEGPG 0456C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Rane Brake Lining Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2834/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in.accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section I.T.A. No.2834/Chny/2019 10 148…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT Ltu-II, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1836/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in.accordance with the new I.T.A. No.1836/Chny/2017 19 Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 14…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 2308/CHNY/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 28

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1707/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 28

…assessment year." 16. This new Section has made a radical departure from the original Section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original Section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to Section 147. 17. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT (1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to Section 147 notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new Section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under Section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to Section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued m…