Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors.

454 ITR 326High Court2023#7045 most cited

What is Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors. authority for?

A notice issued under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act is vitiated if it is not accompanied by proper material, or if the information provided is incorrect. Furthermore, the submissions filed by the assessee in response to a section 148A(b) notice must be considered when passing an order under section 148A(d).

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Anurag Gupta v. ITO · section 148A(b) · section 148A(d) · incorrect information · non-consideration of submissions · reassessment notice · section 147 · section 148 · validity of notice

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 37(1)Section 133ASection 148A(b)Section 148A(d)

Issues it is cited on

section 148a(c)section 148(d)section 148 noticesanctioning authorityinfrastructure facilitybusiness expediencysection 148a(b)fees for technical servicessection 148a(d)section 148anon-application of mindsection 149(1)(b)

Judgments citing Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors.

Govind Mansharam Dingwa, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 22(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5020/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

…o weeks thereafter;" [Emphasis Supplied] V. Further, the following observations of the various High Courts on the aspect of providing material relied upon along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act also merit attention as under: (a) Anurag Gupta v. ITO [454 ITR 326 (Bom HC)] It goes without saying that providing information to the Petitioner, without furnishing the material based upon which the section 148A(b) of the Act totally illusive and ephemeral. The fact that the material also was required to be supplied can very well be gauged from the clear directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi…

Govind Mansharam Dingwa, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 22(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5019/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

…o weeks thereafter;" [Emphasis Supplied] V. Further, the following observations of the various High Courts on the aspect of providing material relied upon along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act also merit attention as under: (a) Anurag Gupta v. ITO [454 ITR 326 (Bom HC)] It goes without saying that providing information to the Petitioner, without furnishing the material based upon which the section 148A(b) of the Act totally illusive and ephemeral. The fact that the material also was required to be supplied can very well be gauged from the clear directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi…

Abhishek Jayketu Joshi, Mumbai vs. Ac Cir-42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5775/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarabhishek Jayketu Joshi Ac Cir-42(2)(1), C-73, Venus Society, R. G. Kautilya Bhavan, Thadani Marg, Worli Sea Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Face, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Ackpj8583H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri M. M. Golvala, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…s not been discharged in the present case. 21. In support of the jurisdictional challenge, the learned Authorised Representative placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Anurag Gupta v. Income-tax Officer [2023] 150 taxmann.com 99 / 454 ITR 326, and submitted that the ratio laid down therein squarely applies to the facts of the present case. It was contended that the Hon’ble High Court has categorically held that furnishing of information without supplying the material relied upon renders the proceedings under section 148A(b) unsustainable, as it deprives the assessee of an effective op…

Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 29, New Delhi

ITA 5519/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2015-16 Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Vs. Acit, 98, Okhla Industrial Estate Central Circle-29, Phase Iii, New Delhi. Tehkhand, New Delhi – 110 020. Pan: Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi; Shri Satya Jeet Goel; & Shri Rajat Garg, Cas Revenue By : Shri Amit Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Shri R.S. SinghviFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69ASection 80ISection 92C

…ates the notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act and is fatal to the validity of reopening u/s 147 of the Act. The legal position to this effect is well settled and reference is rightly made by ld. Counsel to following judicial precedents: i. Anurag Gupta v. ITO [2023] 454 ITR 326 (Bombay) ii. Yuva Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2023] 150 taxmann.com 187 (Gujarat) iii. Alkem Laboratories Ltd. v. PCIT [2023] 459 ITR 551 (Patna) iv. Vinod Lalwani v. UOI [2023] 455 ITR 738 (Chhattisgarh) v. ITO v. B C Enterprises (ITA No. 4972/Del/24) (ITAT, Delhi) 7. Ld. Counsel has contended that the Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 30/07/20…

Zalavadiya Kalubhai Mohanbhai, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 806/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountannt Member Assessment Year 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…laced on the following: ➤Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT - [2017] 398 ITR 198 (Delhi) ➤Patel Engineering Ltd. v. DCIT (Bombay) [2022] 136 taxmann.com 115 ➤Yuva Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [2023] 150 taxmann.com 187 (Gujarat) ➤ Anurag Gupta v. ITO [2023] 454 ITR 326 (Bombay) ➤Babcock Borsig Ltd. v. UOI- [2022] 449 ITR 613 (Calcutta) In view of the above, the assessee submitted that the reopening of the assessment by the A.O. is bad in law without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed. As regards merits of the case, i.e. ground no. 4, the ld. A.R. has given the comment/written submissions which are as fol…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. Cec-Itd Cem-Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 5227/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. Cec-Itd Cem-Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 5226/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
Section 133ASection 147Section 148A

…port reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act w…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. Cec-Itd Cem-Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai

ITA 5225/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2019-20
Section 133ASection 147Section 148ASection 37(1)

…port reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act w…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. Cec-Itd Cem-Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 5224/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. Cec-Itd Cem-Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 5223/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2022-23
Section 133ASection 147Section 148A

…ort reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act w…

Cec- Itd Cem Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 4681/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…rt reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Cec - Itd Cem Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4680/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Cec- Itd Cem Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4679/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Cec-Itd Cem Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4678/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Cec- Itd Cem Tpl Joint Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4677/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148A

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

Ratnashri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 4, New Delhi

ITA 1607/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 141(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…nal/confidential report only) and so same can not be utlilised against assessee sans same being confronted to assesssee (refer hon’ble rajastha high court in case of Micro Marbles 'Pvt Ltd vs ITO 457 ITR 569 and hon ’ble Bombay high Court in Anurag Gupta case 454 ITR 326 and further same has not been lawfully inducted vide separate/mandatory corresponding notice u/s 148 (refer delhi high court in Ranbaxy laboratories case 336 ITR 136 and Mumbai G bench of ITAT in case of Juliet industries ltd vs ITO (ITA 5452/Mum/2016 order dated 04.04.2018 and delhi C bench IT AT in case of INS Finance investment pvt ltd vs. ITO…