← 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

Jogindra Kotapalli, Rajahmundry vs. ITO., Ward-1(1), Tirupati

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

ITA 688/HYD/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.688/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Shri Jogindra Kotapalli, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1(1), Tirupati. Rajahmundry. Pan:Alnpk2330F (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms. Aditi Goyal, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Jogindra Kotapalli (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 21.02.2025 For The A.Y. 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Aditi Goyal, SR-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 19.03.2022. As there was no response from the assessee, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the Ld. AO on 07.04.2022. In response, the assessee filed return of income on 28.06.2023 declaring total income of Rs.1

Sudhakar Akutota, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Warangal

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

ITA 1068/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1068/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Shri Sudhakar Akutota, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. Pan: Abapa0044M (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A. V. Raghuram, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 04/09/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Sudhakar Akutota (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 05.06.2024 For The A.Y. 2013-14. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 296 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Accompanied By An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. The Learned Authorised

For Appellant: Shri A. V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR

under section 139 of the Act. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act, and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 28.03.2021. The assessee did not file any return of income in response to the said notice

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Prem Chand Pravesh Kumar, Delhi

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 736/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Vs. Prem Chand Pravesh New Delhi Kumar, (Through Erstwhile Partner Sanchit Garg), 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, Delhi- 110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfp9925A Co No. 120/Del/2025 (In Ita No. 736/Del/2025) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Prem Chand Pravesh Vs. Acit, Kumar, (Through New Delhi Erstwhile Partner Sanchit Garg), 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, Delhi- 110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfp9925A Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv Shri Pawan Garg, Ca Ms. Ishika Dua, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151

said order is reproduced herein below:- “65. Thus, in the facts of the present case, the last date for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act for AY 2013-14 under the statutory framework, as was existing prior to 01.04.2021 was 31.03.2020, that is, six years from ... dated 27.04.2021]. Thus, the notice dated 01.06.2021 was issued twenty-nine days prior to the expiry of period of limitation for issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act as was extended by TOLA. As noted above, the period from 01.06.2021, the date of issuance of notice

S. Panneerselvam, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncc-10(3), Chennai

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

ITA 1688/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1688/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 S. Panneerselvam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 11, Vivek Nagar, Kolathur, Non Corporate Circle 10(3), Chennai 600 099. Chennai. [Pan: Ainpp3051B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.02.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 43 Days. The Assessee Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons In Support Of An Affidavit. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, I Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 292BSection 69ASection 69C

payments to the total income of the assessee. She further submits that besides challenging the additions on merits, the assessee agitated issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR vehemently argued that since the return of income filed belatedly ... response to the notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee is precluded from taking any objection in the proceedings stating that the notice was served upon him in an improper manner in terms of section 292BB of the Act. She further argued that since the assessment was completed