“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

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 953/CHNY/2025[953]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

Assessing Officer. The only requirement is that the Assessing Officer ought to have considered the objection now raised in the grounds for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act, during the original assessment proceedings. There can be no doubt in the present facts as evidenced by a letter dated

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 952/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 951/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

Clan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Ward-1(2), Chennai

ITA 2303/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr. N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 148Section 148ASection 149

Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 apply “notwithstanding anything contained in the specified Act”. Section 3(1), therefore, overrides the time limits for issuing a notice under section 148 read with section 149 of the Income-tax Act; (d) Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 does ... Revenue between April 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021 as show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). Thereafter, the Revenue issued notices under section 148 of the new regime between July and August 2022. Invalidation of the section 148 notices issued under the new regime on the ground

SHI vs. Hankar Agarwal Hufhuf, Andheri (East)Vs.Income Tax Officer 31(2)(1), Mumbai, Bandra (East)

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2468/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Bansal & Shri AjayFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 251

income for AY 2010-11 on 15.10.2010 declaring a total income of Rs.8,76,380/-. The assessment was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act dated 27.11.2015 based on the information received from DGIT (Inv.) that the assessee has obtained bogus bills towards purchases from alleged ... where an addition of Rs. 1,60,08,115/- towards bogus purchases were made. Subsequently the AO once again issued a notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2017, requiring the assessee to submit the return of income on the ground that he had reason to belief that the income has escaped

Sangeeta Goel L/H Surendra Prakash Jain, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(3)(5), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 924/SRT/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

admitted position that the original assessee 'B' died on 2- 12-2009. It is also an admitted fact that the notice under section 148 to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10 has been issued against the dead person, i.e., the deceased assessee. Thus the reassessment proceedings have

Udhavrao Raghunath Kharate, Aurangabad vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1470/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1470/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Udhavrao Raghunath Kharate, V The Income Tax Officer, 220/1, Raghunandini Niwas, S Ward-1(1), Aurangabad. Near Bsnl Tower, At Post Maniknagar, Teh. Sillod District, Aurangabad – 431135. Pan: Apupk3432R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ramesh N. Thete –Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/08/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(A)-1, Gurugram Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.04.2025 For The A.Y.2011-12 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 05.12.2018. Ita No.1470/Pun/2025 [A] Submission Of Ld.Ar :

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 44ASection 68

observed that the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.148 on 20.03.2018. The assessee filed Return of Income in response to notice under section 148 on 14.06.2018 declaring total income of Rs.4,39,780/-. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.143(2) and 4 ITA No.1470/PUN/2025 [A] notice u/s.142

Daya Shanker Tiwari, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), I T Tower, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 827/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, K A Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kannan, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

been escaped assessment on account of under assessment of gift to the extent of Rs.6 lakhs received from Sri Pradeep Tiwari. Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 was issued and served upon the assessee. In response to notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee

Venkatarama Satya Surya Narayana Murthy Raju Sagi, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 788/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.788/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2018-19) Shri Venkatarama Satya Surya Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-6(1), Hyderabad. Narayana Murthy Raju Sagi, Hyderabad. Pan:Athps0867M (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram & Shri P. Vinod, Advocates रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 23/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 08/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M. : This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Venkatarama Satya Surya Narayana Murthy Raju Sagi (“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 30.04.2025 For The A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram & Shri PFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 37

basis of information regarding alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs.13,58,94,043/- from four parties. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2022. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed his return of income on 10.11.2022, declaring the same income

Khajamoinuddin Mahammad, Warangal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Warangal

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

ITA 571/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69Section 69A

satisfied with the response and passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act on 30.03.2023, and issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on the same date. 4. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Consequently ... specified in section 149(1)(b) of the Act. 7. He further submitted that, the relevant assessment year is 2016— 17 and the notice under section 148 was issued on 30.03.2023, which is beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Hence, the notice is barred

Srinivas Sasapu, Usa vs. ADIT (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 459/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri G. Sivasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik

Section 139Section 144C(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

No.459/Hyd/2025 3 Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). On the basis of information received through the insight portal, the Ld. AO issued notice under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2023. In response, the assessee filed return of income on 17.04.2023 declaring an income of Rs.10

Thingal Oli Manimekalai, Thanjavur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Thanjavur

ITA 2666/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon'Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2666/Chny/2024 Thingal Oli Manimekalai, No.2/520, Keela Vannipattu, Okkanadu Keelaiyur, P.O Orathanadu, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu-614 625 [Pan: Csfpm9258R] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

Scheme.—For the purpose of this Scheme, - (a) assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147 of the Act, (b) issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, shall be through automated allocation, in accordance with risk management strategy formulated by the Board as referred to in section 148

Muniraju Vijayalakshmi, Chikkaballapura vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikkaballapura

ITA 263/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 50CSection 54F

issued to the assessee which was duly served to the assessee on the e-mail provided. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act the assessee filed return on 12.04.2022 declaring Nil income and claimed refund of Rs.1160/-. Subsequently, other statutory notices were issued to the assessee. During

M/S. United Industries, Mumbai vs. ITO. Ward 22(3)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 564/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P ShahFor Respondent: 09.07.2025

Section 148Section 250Section 68B

148A(1) (d) of the Act. (2) On the facts and circumstances and in law, erred in proceeding reassessment the notice under section 148, read with section 148A, without considering the legal requirement as to under what specified conditions, that are laid down, under the provisions of section

ITO-28(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Satya Prakash Singh, Mumbai

In the result, the ground so taken by the assessee so far as it relates to challenging the order of the AO as passed beyond the period of limitation is hereby allowed

ITA 3844/MUM/2025[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

recomputation shall be made under section 147 after the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the notice under section 148 was served: Provided that where the notice under section 148 is served on or after the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions

Alpa Rajendra Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2762/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble

Section 10(38)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

covered. 3. In alternative submission, the Id. AR of the assessee submits that case of assessee was reopened the completed assessment, by issuing notice under section 148 dated 22.03.2018. The case was reopened on the basis of information of Investigation Wing. The assessing officer has not verified the information before ... issuing notice under section 148. Once, the transaction of purchase in previous financial year was not doubted, the sale of same cannot be doubted when transaction of purchase as well as sales were carried through Bombay Stock Exchange. The assessing officer as well as Id. CIT(A) acted mechanically without

Tushar Enterprises, Goregaon East, Mumbai vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra East Mumbai

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

ITA 2542/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailtushar Enterprises, 2-A/401-402 Dheeraj Valley, Mohan Gokhale Road, Saibaba Complex, Goregaon East, Mumbai ............... Appellant Maharahstra - 400063 Pan : Aaaft1242R V/S Income Tax Officer, ……………… Respondent Ward – 41(4)(4), Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Asif Karmali, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50C

sold an immovable property during the year under consideration below the market price and did not file the original return of income, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 08.03.2016 and proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. In response to the notice, the assessee ... Further, on the basis of the information received by the AO that the assessee has sold an immovable property below the market rate, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. It is the plea of the learned

Mr. Satya Prakash Singh, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-28(3)(1), Vashi

In the result, the ground so taken by the assessee so far as it relates to challenging the order of the AO as passed beyond the period of limitation is hereby allowed

ITA 3715/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 69C

Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt Ltd, Indore vs. ACIT Central-2, Bhopal

In the result- Impugned order is set aside and Penalty of

ITA 32/IND/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 27Section 271(1)(b)

reply despite of numerous opportunities provided to the appellant. Accordingly, the AO held that the assessee has failed to comply with the notice under section 148 of the 'Act' and levied penalty of amount Rs 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b)of the Act for the A.Y.2015-16. 4.1.2. On perusal

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle, Jaipur vs. Vinus Vinit Hirawat, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 142/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Harsh M. Kapadia, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 148Section 153CSection 250

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