“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

Omkara Impex and Merchandise LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 809/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.809/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omkara Impex & The Acit Merchandise Llp बनाम / Circle-3(3)(2) 301, Primate V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Judges Bungalows Road Bodakdev Ahmedabad - 380 054 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaefo 2861 K (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/03/2024, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"], Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao"] Under Section 147 R.W.S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15.

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

assessee had obtained accommodation entries of Rs.69,18,469/- from M/s. Aryan Trading Co. in Financial Year (FY) 2013-14. Accordingly, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 31/03/2021, after obtaining approval under Section 151. The assessee did not file its return of income in response ... notice under Section 148 of the Act. The AO issued multiple notices under Sections 142(1) and 143(2) of the act, calling for details. However, the assessee remained non-compliant and failed to furnish supporting documents to substantiate the purchases. The AO passed a best judgment assessment under Section

Ghanshyam Ramchandra Kriplani, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Intl. Taxn. Ward-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 566/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Ghanshyam Ramchandra The Ito, International Kriplani, 5, Netaji Society Vs Taxn., Ward-1 Nr. Jai Hind High School Ahmedabad. Maninagar Ahmedabad 380 008. Pan : Aycpk 3430 A (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divetia, Ar & Shri Samir Vora, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271Section 69

source of investment and no return being filed by the assessee, the income of the assessee had escaped assessment. Accordingly, thereafter, notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee, requiring the assessee to file return of income, in response to which the assessee filed return declaring NIL income claiming

Sanjivani Cheritable Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 406/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2012-13 Sanjivani Charitable Trust Vs. The Ito, Ward-7(2)(1) Tenament No.8 Ahmedabad. Isanpur Park Society Nr.Municipal Garden Naroda, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaits 6269 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parin S. Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri J.L. Bhatia, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri J.L. Bhatia, Sr.DR

Section 10Section 139Section 148Section 250(6)

reasons that the assessee had not filed original return of income, rather it had filed the return only in response to the notice under section 148 of the Act. 5. Referring to the facts of the case, it was pointed out that the assessee was a trust ... contract receipt of Rs.12,54,400/- from Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation during the year, therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 6. In response to the same, the assessee filed return of income declaring income at Rs.1,00,760/-. The return

Amit Chhaganlal Jain, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(7), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1294/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14 Amit Chhaganlal Jain Ito, Ward-4(1)(7) B/4, Khanderao Colony Vs Baroda. R.V. Desai Road Opp: Gopal Der Ganotri Apartments Baroda 390 004. Pan : Agdpj 6312 M (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Manish J. Shah, Shri Rushin Patel & Shri Vishal Jagetia, Ars. : Shri B. P. Srivastav, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

asked for the notices issued. 4. It was based on this information that re-assessment proceedings were initiated on the assessee by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and the addition made on account of the alleged accommodation entry taken by the assessee by way of unsecured loan

Bao Value Fund, Mumbai vs. ACIT, International Tax, Circle-1(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 947/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta a/w TarangFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144CSection 147Section 68

initiated the reassessment proceedings in assessee's case and passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act along with notice under section 148 on 26.03.2022. The AO called on the assessee to furnish details pertaining to the impugned transaction and the assessee submitted the details as called

Income Tax Department, Mumbai vs. Perry Impex, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6984/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

ground no.1, the assessee has contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming issue of notice under section 148 on non-existent entity and resultant order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 on non-existent entity i.e.‘Perry Impex’ is also bad in law and require to be quashed ... assessee has contested the validity of the reassessment order by claiming that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming reassessment proceeding by issuing notice under section 148 which is bad in law and require to be quashed. 5. The ld.CIT(A) has duly considered the issue and held that there

ACIT-19(1), Mumbai vs. Perry Impex, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6983/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Mohd.Salim Abdul Hakim Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 26(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6848/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal a/w Shri OmFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69A

notice under section 148A(b) of the Act. Thereafter the AO passed an order under section 148A(d) and also issued the notice under section 148 on 28.07.2022. The AO vide order dated 23.05.2023 completed the assessment by making an addition under section 69A of the Act to the tune ... section dated 28.07.2022 is barred by limitation as per the provisions of section 149. The ld AR submitted that the AO issued the notice under section 148(b) on 28.05.2022 giving 15 days time to furnish the reply and the assessee not being aware of the issue of such notice

Perry Impex, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6800/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Perry Impex, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 6799/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5606/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C, Kanojiya, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Pursuant to this statement, case of the assessee was reopened by issuing notice under section 148, dated 29.03.2016. Assessee had received interest free advances from its holding company i.e. BRFL. Assessee had advanced interest free loans to its wholly owned subsidiary, i.e. BRFL Italia SRL out of the advances

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5605/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C, Kanojiya, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5604/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C, Kanojiya, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

DCIT-1(2)1, Mumbai vs. Bombay Rayon Holdings Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals by the Revenue having common ground are dismissed

ITA 5603/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C, Kanojiya, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Novanet India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward Ward 15(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4505/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Shah a/w Jainam

Section 112Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 201Section 250Section 9(1)(vii)

proceedings under section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and after passing the order under section 148A(d) issued a notice under section 148 of the Act. The assessee submitted that the amount paid by the assessee to NSPL is towards purchase of VoIP minutes which

Ra Fashions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Mumbai

ITA 2632/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali ParekhFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

assessment order passed by Ld. A.O. in gross violation of principles of natural justice.” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 on 23/04/2021. It is admitted position that the aforesaid notice ... India vs. Ashish Agarwal 444 ITR 1 (SC) [04/05/2022] communication dated 24/05/2022, was sent to the Assessee intimating the Assessee that the aforesaid notice issued section 148 of the Act (under old regime) would be treated as the show cause notice issued in terms of Section 148A

Siemens Mobility Gmbh, Germany vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(International Tax), 4(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4713/MUM/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Josh a/w Bhavin

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 270A

assessment year 1997-98 was completed on 25-2-2000. On 3-22-2000, there was a search and consequent there to, notice under section 148 dated 26-3-2003 was issued to the assessee. Consequent to the search, block assessment order was framed on 30-11-2008 in which

ACIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi vs. Venus Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4452/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 127Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 56

Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for the reason ‘non-filing of return’ as well as based on the information that

Intimate Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 539/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 539/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Intimate Commotrade Private Limited,……Appellant 5/1, 4Th Floor, Room No. 125, Clive Row, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aacci4983R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………....Respondent Ward-6(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148

year 2012-13. Therefore, the ld. Assessing officer had reason to believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment and accordingly notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee on 27.03.2019. The assessee filed its return on 08.04.2019 with a total income at ‘NIL and again notices

Dhanushkodi Harideertham, Pudukottai vs. ITO, Intl Taxnl Ward 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 214/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)

matter stood thus, the Revenue audit party raised objection regarding incorrect classification and computation of capital gain, in pursuance of the same, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 19.04.2021. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2014-15 on 13.10.2021. Since, the said case ... relied upon for issuance of extended reassessment notice with a request to furnish a reply on or before 15.06.2022 as to why a notice under section 148 of the Act should not be issued on the basis of information available on record. After considering the submission of the assessee