← All Phrases

“notice under section 148”

ReassessmentSection 148Section 1487,377 judgments

The decision most relied on for notice under section 148 is CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), cited in 3,235 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on notice under section 148

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court
1,589
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO
259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court
1,349
citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal
469 ITR 46 · 2024 · Supreme Court
713
citing judgments

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar
268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court
695
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

Tin Box Company v. CIT
249 ITR 216 · 2001 · Supreme Court
624
citing judgments

When an issue is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the AO must conduct a de novo examination and provide the assessee a full opportunity of being heard. The assessee is bound to comply with the notices issued by the AO.

Judgments citing notice under section 148

Ace Tyres Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1088/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Section 149(1)(b)(ii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Ace Tyres Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1087/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Accordingly Page 2 of 78 grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted mechanically ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Ace Tyres Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1086/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Accordingly Page 2 of 78 grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted mechanically ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Ace Tyres Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1085/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1084 To 1088 & 1027/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Section 149(1)(b)(ii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Ace Tyres Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1084/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Accordingly Page 2 of 78 grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted mechanically ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Celestial Vision Limited, Bvi vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1625/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1625/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Celestial Vision V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited बिधम Income Tax Circle 2(1)(1) Po Box No. 146, Road 604, Kautilya Bhawan, G Block, Town, Tortola, British Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra Virgin Islands (East)400051. 111000. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaicc1160A Appellant/अपीलधथी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्धाररिी की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri. Vipul J. Shah-Adv. रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Krishna Kumar Sr Dr सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date Of Hearing 05.08.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Vipul J. Shah-AdvFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar SR DR
Section 115ASection 144C(5)Section 44BSection 9(1)(vi)

specific material which alleged that income had escaped assessment. This is sufficient to satisfy the "reason to believe" test laid down. The notice under Section 148 was issued after obtaining the necessary approvals from the prescribed authority. With insertion of section 148A and amendment of section 147 and section 148

Kiran, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-43(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1495/DEL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69ASection 69C

matter note and humbly requested to dispose the appeal as fully covered on legal ground." 5. Before us, ld. AR submitted that the notice under section 148 of the Income- tax Act, was issued to the assessee dated 30.07.2022 with the approval of ld. PCIT, Delhi-15 and the same ... amended by the Finance Act, 2021 (before it amendment by the Finance Act. 2022) reads as under- 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year.- (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case/ails under

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Damodar Prasad Parwal, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 959/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA (Thru:VC)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

person other than on whom search was conducted, Section 153C is to be resorted to without giving any finding that issuance of notice under section 148 was incorrect. Thus, the CIT (A) is not justified in quashing notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. (iii) Whether the Learned ... erred in overturning the issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the precedent set by the Hon. Supreme Court of India in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Circle 1(2) V/s. M/s. M.R. Shah Logistics Private Limited

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Gordhan Das Maheshwari, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 958/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

person other than on whom search was conducted, Section 153C is to be resorted to without giving any finding that issuance of notice under section 148 was incorrect. Thus, the CIT (A) is not justified in quashing notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. (iii) Whether the Learned ... erred in overturning the issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the precedent set by the Hon. Supreme Court of India in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Circle 1(2) V/s. M/s. M.R. Shah Logistics Private Limited

Tirupati Engineers and Contructions, Sangrur vs. ITO, Sangrur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 138/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) submitted that during appellate proceedings, several notices under Section 250 were issued but the assessee failed to file any written submissions or attend hearings. Considering repeated non-compliance, the CIT(A) held that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Relying on judicial precedents, it was observed that an appeal requires active prosecution and mere filing is insufficient. As the assessee provided no evidence or arguments in sup

For Appellant: Shri Vibhor Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

time of hearing. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm, in response to notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, filed its return of income on 01.10.2019, declaring income of Rs . 7,140/- for AY 2012-13. The case ... various grounds. It was urged that the assessee had raised serious issues relating to the jurisdiction of reopening, the validity of the notice under section 148, and also the merits of the addition; however, the Ld. CIT(A) chose not to deal with any of them and summarily dismissed

Narendrakumar Shankarbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(10), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 830/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

grounds of appeal are as under:- I.T.A No. 830/Ahd/2025 Narendrakumar Shankarbhai Patel, A.Y. 2011-12 “1. The learned AO has erred in issuing notice under Section 148 based on Investigation Report and alleged incriminating material found during search in as much notice under Section 153C only could have been issued

Rajnibhai Bhogilal Desai, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Nadiad

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

ITA 533/AHD/2025[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee’s regular return of income. Based on this I.T.A No. 533/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2002-03 3 Rajnibhai Bhogilal Desai vs. ITO information, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2009, and in response, the assessee filed return of income on 16.10.2009 declaring income

Jayeshkumar Baldevbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 595/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 250

return and disclose full and true material facts. Accordingly, the case was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, and notice under section 148 was issued on 31.03.2019. In response, the assessee filed his return of income on 03.10.2019, declaring a long-term capital loss of Rs.12

Muthiah Lakshmanan, Chennai vs. ITO Ncw 10(3), Chennai

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

ITA 1958/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1958/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Muthiah Lakshmanan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 16/3, Seethaamma Colony, 1 Main Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Road, 2Nd Street, Alwarpet, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Adopl7512R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.11.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. On Perusal Of The Assessment Order, We Note That The Assessing Officer Made Additions On Account Of Income From Speculation & Income From Unexplained Investment. Admittedly, No Return Of Income

For Appellant: Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT
Section 144Section 148Section 69A

income from unexplained investment. Admittedly, no return of income 2 I.T.A. No.1958/Chny/25 was filed by the assessee even in response to the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The Assessing Officer made addition on account of income from speculation as per NMS data ... assessment year 2011-12, my assessment was reopened by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 10(3), Chennai, by issue of a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.03.2018. Thereafter, the assessment was completed ex parte on 27.12.2018 under section 144 of the Income

Sri Venugopalakrishna Credit Cooperative Society Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1313/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12 Sri Venugopalakrishna Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society, Ward – 5(2)(4), No.123/3, 9Th Cross, 2Nd Main Chamajpet, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 018. Pan :Aabas 6974 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. H. Guruswamy, Itp Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. H. Guruswamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 148Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

issued under section 148 of the Act on 28.03.2018 which was served to the assessee. Assessee filed return of income in pursuance to notice under section 148 of the Act. Accordingly, other statutory notices were issued to the assessee and the assessee submitted documents as called for. Assessee is engaged

Income Tax Officer-42(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Kartik Gunwantrai Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2182/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailincome Tax Officer – 42(1)(3), Room No.735, 7Th Floor Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400051 V/S Kartik Gunwantrai Shah, Prop. Gati Solvochem, B-3, Jalaram, Ganjawala Lane, ……………… Respondent Borivali (West), Mumbai - 400092 Pan : Awaps4637D Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vikas Chandra, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Chandra, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 46A

obtained bills amounting to Rs.3,51,358/- from such entry providers which were declared as hawala by the Sales Tax Department, Maharashtra. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 07.03.2014 on the basis that income to an extent of Rs.3

Avon Containners Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 5161/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

reopening of case 16, not comes subsequently to his notice. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued in the case is bad in-law, void and without jurisdiction. 4 Avon Containners ... decided by holding that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (‘PCIT’) had granted approval through ITBA portal on 27.03.2029 before the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act; hence, he dismissed the appeal as under: “The appellant, in its written submission dated 17.09.2024, emphasized on ground

Gajanand Financial Consultancy Private Limited, Nagpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Nagpur, Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 126/NAG/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

kind reference. In case you require any assistance in filing your response, you may contact toll free Call Centre number 1800 103 4215.” Notice under section 148 dated 19/02/2021 (Paper Book Page–3) was issued after obtaining necessary satisfaction of the learned PCIT (Central), Nagpur. ix) It is worthwhile ... when learned PCIT herself was satisfied that income had escaped to the tune of ` 5,57,10,000. 17. Prior to issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, and more so when the addition has been done on the same amount, there can be hardly any scope

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust, Bareilly vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Bareilly

ITA 182/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

assessments for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, which were also reopened by issue of notice under section 148 on account of the cancellation of registration under section 12A, the assessments had been completed at nil income after allowing the benefit of section

Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust, Bareilly vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Bareilly

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

assessments for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, which were also reopened by issue of notice under section 148 on account of the cancellation of registration under section 12A, the assessments had been completed at nil income after allowing the benefit of section