“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

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 901/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

same is hereby quashed." 5.23 The fact that the AO mentioned unsecured loan in the reasons for reopening shows that he mechanically issued notice under section 148 of the Act, on the basis of information allegedly received by him from the Directorate of Income Tax (Investigation) without proper application ... Oversight by the AO in earlier assessments cannot justify reopening. 4. CIT(A)’s Observations: a. The AO mechanically issued the notice under Section 148, without proper application of mind or addressing objections raised by the appellant. b. The reopening and subsequent reassessment were quashed on the basis

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 875/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

ITA 873/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 872/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

same is hereby quashed. 5.23 The fact that the AO mentioned unsecured loan in the reasons for reopening shows that he mechanically issued notice under section 148 of the Act, on the basis of information allegedly received by him from the Directorate of Income Tax (Investigation) without proper application ... Oversight by the AO in earlier assessments cannot justify reopening. 4. CIT(A)’s Observations: a. The AO mechanically issued the notice under Section 148, without proper application of mind or addressing objections raised by the appellant. b. The reopening and subsequent reassessment were quashed on the basis

Kawaljit Kaur, Mohali vs. Ward 6(1), Chandigarh, Mohali

ITA 1048/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 148

according to the AO, assessee has made investment of Rs.3,40,15,000/- in purchase of property on 24.10.2010. The AO has issued notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 30.03.2018. He, thereafter, passed an ex-parte assessment on 06.12.2018 and made addition of Rs.3

Ram Kishor Soni, Ahmedabad vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Present AO: the ITO, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1282/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1281&1282/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ram Kishor Soni, 626, Sector No.3, Chankyapuri, Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad-380061 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Blips8712B बनाम/ V/S. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Present A.O.: Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. F. Jain, Ar Revenue By: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 11/03/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Pertain To Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Against The Respective Orders Of Commissioner Of Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"], Confirming The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As "Ao"] Under Section 69A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], On Account Of Unexplained Cash Deposits In The Assessee'S Bank Accounts. Since The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical, They Are Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 69A

that the credit society had allowed huge cash deposits and facilitated accommodation entries through falsified documentation and unauthorized transactions. The AO issued a notice under Section 148 on 28.03.2021, requiring the assessee to explain the source of cash deposits, which remained unanswered. Subsequently, multiple notices under Section 142(1) were

Ram Kishor Soni, Ahmedabad vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Present AO: the ITO, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1281/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.1281&1282/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 69A

Raziulla Syed, Hyderabad vs. ITO (Int Taxn)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 986/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 195

computation shall be made under section 147 before the expiry of twelve months from the end of the financial year in which the notice under section 148 was served. He submitted that in the instant case the Assessing Officer has issued notice u/sec.148 on 23.04.2021 and the time limit ... 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

ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai vs. Rajendra Narpatmal Lodha, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 6971/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kamble & Shri S.R

Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

section 148A of the income tax act (the Act). The AO, after passing an order under clause (d) of section 148A issued a notice under section 148 requiring the assessee to file the return of income. The AO also called on the assessee to file the necessary details

ACIT CC -6(1), Mumbai, Bkc vs. Sanjay Dagadu Deshpute, Nasik

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5680/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi / KetkiFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 148Section 69C

Engineers of PWD Department for influencing their transfer was found. 3. The case of the assessee was reopened by issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act on 14.03.2023. The assessee was confronted with the statements of Shri Shailendra Rathi recorded during the course of search. Shri Ravi Wadepalle

DCIT 42 1 1, Mumbai vs. Satyendra Kumar Triloknath Goyal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4599/MUM/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh & Shri Akshay Pawar, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 68

TOLA 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. TOLA does not extend the life of the old regime. It merely provides a relaxation ... Revenue between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 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

Mr. Shekhar Dadarkar Prop. M/S S.D. Construction, Mumbai vs. ACIT-31(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3412/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ashsh A. Thakurdesai-CAFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

while, in the present case, the reopening notice is dated 9 December 1996. Thus it submitted at the time when the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and the time when assessment was completed, there was no such requirement to furnish to the assessee a copy

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 672/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

148 of the Act on 27th August 2022. The reason is firstly; the intimation letter refers to a DIN with respect to some notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 26th August 2022. The impugned notice issued to petitioner is dated 27th August 2022 and not 26th August ... analysed on the basis of the aforesaid principle, the mechanical way of recording satisfaction by the Joint Commissioner, which accords sanction for issuing notice under section 148, is clearly unsustainable and we find that on such consideration both the appellate authorities have Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. interfered into the matter

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 671/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 670/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

148 of the Act on 27th August 2022. The reason is firstly; the intimation letter refers to a DIN with respect to some notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 26th August 2022. The impugned notice issued to petitioner is dated 27th August 2022 and not 26th August ... analysed on the basis of the aforesaid principle, the mechanical way of recording satisfaction by the Joint Commissioner, which accords sanction for issuing notice under section 148, is clearly unsustainable and we find that on such consideration both the appellate authorities have 15 ITA Nos.669 to 672/JPR/2024 Resonance Eduventures

Resonance Eduventures Limited, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

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

ITA 669/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (Thr. V.C)&For Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153DSection 234DSection 250

Baljit Singh, Ambala vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward-1, Income Tax Office, Ambala

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 754/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 2(40)Section 68

specific finding. In Ground No. 1 assessee has challenged the validity of the re-opening of assessment by issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and in A.Y.2012-13 2 Ground No. 2 assessee has challenged confirmation of addition amounting to Rs.31,36,744/- which ... deposited a sum of Rs.38,19,800/- in cash in a bank account with Punjab National Bank. He recorded reasons and issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The copy of the reasons recorded by the AO are available on page

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambala Cantt vs. Gurvinder Singh, Ambala

In the result, the appeal is treated as partly allowed

ITA 607/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 68

assessee has made a cash deposit of Rs.2,46,75,200/- in his Saving Bank Account, therefore, AO has recorded reasons and issued notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. In response to that, assessee has filed return of income on 25.12.2021 declaring total income of Rs.2

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7 Pune, Pune vs. Kolte Patil Integrated Townships Limited, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2023/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

provisions of section 149 which were in force at the time of issue of notice and which read as under: “149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,- (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless ... exclusions, the assessing officer will have sixty-one days (days between I May 2021. and 30 June 2021] to issue a notice under section 148 of the new 16 ITA Nos.2023 & 2011/PUN/2024 regime. This time starts ticking for the assessing officer after receiving the response of the assessee. In this

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7 Pune, Pune vs. Kolte Patil Integrated Townships Limited, Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2011/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151