← 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

Banarsi Lal, Firozabad vs. ITO 2(2)(1), Firozabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 317/AGR/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Mar 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Us Challenging The Validity Of Assumption Of Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act. These Additional Grounds Go To The Root Of The Matter & The Facts Relevant For Its Adjudication Are Placed On Record. Hence, We Admit The Additional Grounds & Take Up The Same First For Adjudication.

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

vehemently relied on the following decisions of Hon’ble High Courts to drive home the point where necessary sanction to issue notice under section 148 of the Act was obtained from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax as per provisions of section 151 of the Act, the Principal Commissioner

Md. Babar Ali, Malda vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Malda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3175/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

turnover (totalling Rs. 47,17,148/-) despite the appellant declaring a total income of Rs. 4,85,200/- in response to the notice under Section 148. 6. Estimation Overrides Penalty: That since the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment on an "estimated basis" by treating the books of accounts

Md. Babar Ali, Malda vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Malda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3174/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

turnover (totalling Rs. 47,17,148/-) despite the appellant declaring a total income of Rs. 4,85,200/- in response to the notice under Section 148. 6. Estimation Overrides Penalty: That since the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment on an "estimated basis" by treating the books of accounts

Md. Babar Ali, Malda vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), Malda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3173/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

turnover (totalling Rs. 47,17,148/-) despite the appellant declaring a total income of Rs. 4,85,200/- in response to the notice under Section 148. 6. Estimation Overrides Penalty: That since the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment on an "estimated basis" by treating the books of accounts

Narayan Barter Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2572/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

issue of notice' and 'service of notice' under the 1961 Act. Section 149 prescribes the period of limitation. It categorically prescribes that no notice under section 148 shall be issued after the prescribed limitation has lapsed. Section 148(1) provides for ITA No(s). 2572/KOL/2025 Assessment Year

Manoj Rajaram Sharma, Thane vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8313/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmanoj Rajaram Ito - 42(3)(4), Sharma, Mumbai Office No. 615, 6Th Vs. Kautilya Bhawan, C- Floor, Centura Square 41-43, Avenue 3, Near It Park, Sg Barve Videsh Bhavan, G Road, Thane, Block, Bkc, Mumbai Maharashtra-400 604. – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Bytps1944K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suryadev Yadav, Shri Karan Hariya & Shri Prashant Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 4Section 44A

income amounting to Rs. 2,16,59,470/- had remained unexplained and had escaped assessment. Accordingly, proceedings under section 147 were initiated and notice under section 148 dated 29.03.2024 was issued to the assessee requiring him to file return of income. During the course of assessment proceedings, notices under section

Mahesh Prakash Bende, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 27(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 8028/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmahesh Prakash Ito Circle - 27(2), Bende 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, 302, 3Rd Floor, Prithvi Vs. It Office, Vashi Park, Sector-30, Vashi Railway Station Navi Mumbai-400 075 Building, Navi Mubmai – 400 703 Pan/Gir No. Alnpb2531M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Devendra Jain, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2026

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 249Section 249(3)Section 250

escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, after obtaining approval under section 151 of the Act, a notice under section 148 dated 22.03.2021 was issued to the assessee requiring him to file the return of income. However, no compliance was made by the assessee. Subsequently

Neeraj, Faridabad vs. Pr, CIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 939/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

clothes. The case was reopened under section 147 of the Act. In response to Page 3 of 12 ITA Nos.928 and 929/Del/2025 notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed Return of Income under section 44AD of the Act on 17/09/2019 declaring an income of Rs.3

Neeraj, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 938/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

clothes. The case was reopened under section 147 of the Act. In response to Page 3 of 12 ITA Nos.928 and 929/Del/2025 notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed Return of Income under section 44AD of the Act on 17/09/2019 declaring an income of Rs.3

Javitri Devi, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(5), Delhi

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

ITA 6619/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumara.Yr. : 2016-17 Javitri Devi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, R-7, Nehru Enclave, Ward 30(5), Kalkaji New Delhi New Delhi – 110 019 (Pan: Aafpd2491M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. S.C. Garg, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 13Section 148Section 148ASection 151

directed against the order dated 21/8/2025 of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi. 2. Before us, ld. AR submitted that the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, was issued to the assessee dated 29.07.2022 with the approval of ld. PCIT-10, Delhi and the same is placed

Harbhol Singh, Sunam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Sunam

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 788/CHANDI/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.788/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Harbhol Singh Ito H. No. 863, Village – Sheron, Aayakar Bhawan, Income Tax बनाम/ Vs. Suman Road, Sunam Officer, Ward Sunam, Sangrur District : Sangrur Punjab - 148028 Punjab - 148028 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Cssps-9948-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Deepinder Singh (Advocate) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26-02-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 19-03-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Krinwant Sahay () This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/ Nfac, Delhi Dt. 16/05/2025 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. In The Present Appeal Assessee Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Sh. Deepinder Singh (Advocate)For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) Ld. Sr. DR
Section 148

declaring a total income of Rs. 4,120/- and agricultural income of Rs. 4,86,143/-. The case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148. The case was reopened based on information that the assessee sold land for Rs. 65,25,000/- at Sunam and made cash deposits

Vineet Kumar, Dharamshala vs. Income Tax Officer, Dharmshala

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

ITA 1090/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Mar 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69A

were found credited in the bank account of the assessee. Based on such information, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Subsequently, notices under section 142(1) were issued from time to time. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to furnish ... addition made under section 69A of the Act. The grounds, inter alia, include challenge to jurisdiction on account of alleged invalid issuance of notice under section 148, non-compliance of procedure prescribed under section 148A, improper invocation of best judgment assessment despite compliance, and failure of the authorities below

Arimilli Rama Krishna, West Godavari Dist vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Rajahmundry

ITA 639/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 263

information that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30.03.2019, was issued and served upon the assessee. In compliance, the assessee filed his return of income on 30.03.2019, declaring ... force and is dismissed. 6.4 In the third ground the appellant has contended that he applied for reasons recorded before issues of notice under section 148 which were not supplied by the AO. Accordingly the assessment is bad in law as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

Allrui Srinivas Raju, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-12(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1923/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1923/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Allrui Srinivas Raju, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Circle-12(1), Pan: Ahepr6968H Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri K C Devdas, Ca Assessee Represented By राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Department Represented By सुनवाईसमा"तहोनेक""त"थ/ : 12/03/2026 Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/ : 18/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Allrui Srinivas Raju, (“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 17/10/2025 For The A.Y.2016-17. Allrui Srinivas Raju Vs. Dcit 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Rounds Of Appeal:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2

Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed his return of income on 29.04.2021 admitting the same total income

Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward 2(2)(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7401/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Mamgai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT (DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

7401_DEL_2025_ Rajesh Kumar Mishra IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJ

A K Enterprises, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 35(5), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6587/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 234Section 234ASection 270A

made foreign remittance of Rs.34,35,033/- in the bank of account held with Union Bank of India for A.Y. 2019-20. Notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee but no compliance was made by the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the ex-parte assessment

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi, Jhandewalan vs. Krska Capital Private Limited, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 4666/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

take a decision under section 149A(d ) based on the available material and the reply of the assessee; and (iii) issue a notice under section 148 if it was a fit case for reassessment. Once the clock started ticking, the assessing officer was see State of AP v. AP Pensioners ... surviving time limit, as prescribed under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA, was available to the assessing officers to issue the reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. 112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on 1 May 2021 under the old regime

Shailesh Kumar, New Delhi vs. Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3641/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Amitabh Shuklashailesh Kumar Vs Acit W-82/1, Eastern Avenue, Sainik Central Circle-27 Farms, New Delhi Jhandewalan, New Delhi Pan: Afppk1645B (Applicant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. P. Mall, Adv Respondent By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.03.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, (‘Ld. Cit (A)’ For Short), New Delhi Dated 28/03/2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. An Assessment Order Came To Be Passed U/S 147 Of The Act On 30/05/2023 By Computing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 72,84,905/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Dated 30/05/2023, Assessee Preferred Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 28/03/2025, Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 3(1)

direct conflict or inconsistency. Section 3(1) overrides Section 149 only to the extent of relaxing the time limit for issuance of reassessment notice under Section 148. The time limit for issuance of a reassessment notices, which fall for completion between 20 March 2020 and 31 March 2021, has been ... period of limitation as prescribed under Section 149(1) of the Act. Since TOLA was not applicable in respect of the said notices under Section 148 of the Act for AY 2015-16 as conceded by the Revenue in the case of v. Rajeev Bansal (supra), the impugned notice

Vandana Singh, Noida vs. ITO 5(2)(5) Noida, Noida

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

ITA 2816/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarvandana Singh, Ito, 5(2)(5), 302, Abhinav Apartments, Noida, U.P. Vasundhra Enclave V. Delhi-110096 Pan-Dcrps8979A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 69

assessment order under Section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of AIR information from insight portal without service of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the appellant which is sin quo non for re- assessment proceedings. Therefore, the assessment order

Praveen Sanjiv, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-7(3), Chennai

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

ITA 3834/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3834/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Praveen Sanjiv, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 45, W Block, 7Th Street, Anna Non Corporate Ward 7(3), Nagar, Chennai 600 040. Chennai. [Pan: Fzzps0216R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.12.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Ground No. 1 Raised By The Assessee Is General In Nature & Requires No Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

individual and according to the Assessing Officer, no return of income was filed by the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act by passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed various documents