← 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

Dhanterash Tradewing Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward- 10(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 166/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.166/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dhanterash Tradewing Pvt. Ltd........................…...........................……….……Appellant No.101, Real Tech Park, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705. [Pan: Aadcd6307R] Vs. Ito, Ward-10(1), Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 27 , 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Against The Order Dated 22.11.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Nfac, Delhi Upholding The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 Dated 19.11.2018 By Ignoring The Fact That The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer In Respect Of Funds Received By The Assessee Company Was Already Subject Matter Of The Revisionary Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Act Which Were Dropped By The Pr. Cit After The Assessee Replying The Show-Cause Notice Issued U/S 263 With All Evidences & Documents By Accepting The Assessee’S Contentions. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.3,851/- Which Was Processed U/S 143(1)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

conclusion that there was no justification in proceeding further. Accordingly, the proposed action under section 263 was dropped. Thereafter the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 proposing to reopen the assessment on the basis of the very same observations recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax. On going through ... Income-tax under section 263, the assessing authority has no jurisdiction to repeat the discussion on the very same issues by issuing notice under section 148 proposing reopening of the assessment under section 147. 13. In the impugned assessment year also, the reasons which prompted the Commissioner of Income