← 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

Mukesh Kumar Bhawarlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 23(2)6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6695/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jalaj Prakash (Adv), Shri SuchekFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri(SRAR)
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 250

jurisdiction by the Ld.AO for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act. The Ld.AR submitted a chart related to issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act and finally, the order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act and the notice was issued under section 148 ... reproduced below: “6. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. In assessee's case, the AO issued the original notice under section 148 dated 29.06.2021 for AY 2015- 16 and consequent to the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agrawal

Ashok Kumar Jain, Meerut vs. PCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by appellant/assessee are allowed

ITA 2627/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhita No. 2627/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita No.2628/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs. Principal Cit, Prop. Mange Lal Prakash Ghaziabad Chand, 45-B Gupta Colony, (Uttar Pradesh) T.P. Nagar, Meerut Pin: 250002 Pan: Aeipj3089E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Piyush Agarwal, Ca Department By: Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.06.2025 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar: The Appeals Filed By The Appellant/Assessee Are Against Separate Orders Dated 27.03.2024 Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Ghaziabad (Hereinafter Referred As ‘Ld. Pcit’ ) Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”) Arising Out Of Separate Assessment Orders, Both Dated 29.03.2022 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As “Ld. Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act For Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Javed Akhtar, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)

reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of Act. Ld. AO issued a notice under Section 148 to the assessee on 30.03.2021 after obtaining necessary approval from competent authority. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, assessee ... income of Rs.3,88,910. Notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 22.06.2021 was issued. Ld. AO issued reasons recorded for notice under Section 148 and approval under Section 151 for issue of notice u/s 148, to the assessee on 25.06.2021. The case was migrated to the "National

Rajeev Malik, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Intl. Taxation 2(2)(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1896/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Rajeev Malik, Vs Acit, Central, 26/28, East Patel Nagar, International Taxation 2(2)(1), New Delhi – 110 008. New Delhi. Pan: Agbpm6372N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 28.03.2024 Passed By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, International Taxation-2(2)(1), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 147 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Ay 2016-17. 2. On Hearing Both The Sides, We Find That Amongst Other Grounds On Merits, The Assessee Has Raised Ground No.2 As Follows:-

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 3

approval should have been obtained from the Principal Chief Commissioner whereas the approval has been obtained from Pr.CIT as stated in the notice under section 148 itself. Therefore we see merit in the contention of the assessee that the notice under section 148 for AY 2016-17 is issued without

Puneet Seth, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2155/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysh. Puneet Sheth Vs. Ito, Ward 3(1) B-39, Mension Villas, Gurugram Rose Wood City, Haryana – 122001 Sector-49, Gurugram Haryana-122001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aojps4547R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv &For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr
Section 140Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234A

appeal.” 2. At the very onset, the Ld.AR Somil Agarwal vehemently submitted that the assessment be quashed on the ground that the notice under Section 148 was never served upon the assessee. P a g e | 3 Sh. Puneet Sheth (AY: 2011-12) 3. On the other hand

Jai Durga Surgicals Private Limited, Patna vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Patna

ITA 363/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Through Virtual Hearing At Kolkata) Jai Durga Surgicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Patna 101, Lotus Apartment, New Patliputra Colony, Bihar Pan No. :Aabcj 7962 N (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Nishant Maitin, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2025

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 147Section 148

grossly erred in misinterpreting the GKN judgement wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court (in para 5 of order) clarified that when a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if the appellant

Arpit Hotel, Patna vs. DCIT Central Circle 3, Patna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 349/PAT/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Through Virtual Hearing At Kolkata)

Section 147Section 148

grossly erred in misinterpreting the GKN judgement wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court (in para 5 of order) clarified that when a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if the appellant

Nitta Gelatin India Limited, Kochi vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 268/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Nitta Gelatin India Limited ..….……….Appellant 50/1002, Sbt Avenue, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi Kerala – 682036 [Pan:Aabck1582H] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle 2(1) , Kochi ..….……….Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Gopi K,CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this basis, the AO formed a belief that income had escaped assessment and reopened the case under Section 147. A notice under Section 148 was issued, and reassessment proceedings followed. Despite multiple notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1), the AO was not satisfied with the assessee’s submissions

Nitta Gelatin India Limited, Kochi vs. Corporate Circle 2(1), Kochi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 258/COCH/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Nitta Gelatin India Limited ..….……….Appellant 50/1002, Sbt Avenue, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi Kerala – 682036 [Pan:Aabck1582H] Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle 2(1) , Kochi ..….……….Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Gopi K,CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

this basis, the AO formed a belief that income had escaped assessment and reopened the case under Section 147. A notice under Section 148 was issued, and reassessment proceedings followed. Despite multiple notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1), the AO was not satisfied with the assessee’s submissions

Mohar Singh Gour, Bhopal vs. ITO NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed is non payment of advance

ITA 650/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 253

facts and circumstances of the case the very initiation proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of notice under section 148 in bad in law and invalid. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer merely on the basis

Mohar Singh Gour, Bhopal vs. ITO NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed is non payment of advance

ITA 649/IND/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Indore05 Jun 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 253

facts and circumstances of the case the very initiation proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and issuance of notice under section 148 in bad in law and invalid. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Learned Assessing Officer merely on the basis

Prashant Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(3), Jpr, Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1340/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: MS. Suhani Meharwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

second notice issued by the revenue reads as under: 1. In the case of the assessee Sh. Prashant Singh, PAN: ANVPS3091B, a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been issued on 31-03- 2022 for the assessment year 2018-19 alongwith order under section 148A ... documents filed by the assessee has been gone through carefully vis-à-vis the information on the basis of which the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been issued to the assessee and income returned by the assessee at Rs. 7,72,670/- is accepted

Dhana-Shree Developers, Mumbai vs. PCIT 27 Mumbai, Navi Mumbai

ITA 1771/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 43C

Assessee on 05/11/2014. Thereafter, reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2015-2016 by issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act on 21/03/2018. In response, the Assessee filed return on 22/05/2018 declaring total income of INR.5,32,80,810/-. The assessment

Pawan Solanki, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 58(3), New Delhi

ITA 697/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2012-13

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

information that assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 57,16,816/- in his bank account maintained with Standard Chartered Bank, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2019 with prior approval from the PCIT-20, New Delhi dated 22.03.2019. Before the Ld. AO no explanation

Sushil Kumar, Delhi vs. ACIT - Circle -22(2), Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3481/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sushil Kumar Vs. Acit Shreeram Overseas Circle-22(2) 5520, Basti Harpull C. R. Building, Singh, Sadar Bazar, Delhi Delhi Pan: Aalpk5068M Appellant Respondent

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 153ASection 69A

provisions of section 149 of the Act, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021, which provides the time limit for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, and the same reads as follows: - "Time limit for notice. 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued ... which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year: Provided that no notice under section 148 shall be issued at any time in a case for the relevant assessment year beginning on or before 1st day of April

Reena Mittal, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee on this additional

ITA 2021/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 292BSection 68

appears from the record and as also submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee that the assessee in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act filed belated return and therefore found to be invalid by the Ld. AO whereupon he concluded the proceedings ... mandatory statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act presumably on the reason that return filed by the assessee in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act was not a valid return. In this regard he has drawn our attention to pages 111-113, para

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1, Jhunjhunu

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1182/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

purchase of aforesaid policies remained unexplained and deserves to be added u/s 69 of the Act. Thus, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on 20.09.2020 and served electronically to the assessee. The assessee filed his return of income ... sustainable as per above judicial pronouncements and irregularities noted. Thus, in that eventuality, I am of the view that the issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act and all the consequent proceedings and assessment order passed was not in accordance with law. The case laws relied upon

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1 Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1180/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

purchase of aforesaid policies remained unexplained and deserves to be added u/s 69 of the Act. Thus, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on 20.09.2020 and served electronically to the assessee. The assessee filed his return of income ... sustainable as per above judicial pronouncements and irregularities noted. Thus, in that eventuality, I am of the view that the issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act and all the consequent proceedings and assessment order passed was not in accordance with law. The case laws relied upon

Ramesh Kumar, Jhunjhunu vs. ITO Ward-1, Jhunjhunu

ITA 1179/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 69

purchase of aforesaid policies remained unexplained and deserves to be added u/s 69 of the Act. Thus, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on 20.09.2020 and served electronically to the assessee. The assessee filed his return of income

Designer Stone Impex, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1272/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Bank of Baroda, but had not filed its return of income for the said year, initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee firm, which however remained un-complied. Also, the notices issued by the A.O. under Section

Sky Scraper Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1110/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra Shah, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Mr. P D Chougule, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 250

other income which has escaped assessment and which, comes to his notice during the course of the proceedings. However, if after issuing a notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped ... escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income. If he intends to do so, a fresh notice under section 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee”. 3 M/s. Sky Scraper Properties