“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

Sakshi Ratneshchand Jain, Mumbai vs. Int Tax Ward 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1741/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 68Section 69C

circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer has erred in passing the order under Section 148A(d) and issuing the notice under Section 148 after obtaining the approval of the Pr. CIT, Mumbai-8 which was not the correct 'specified authority' as per Section 151 (amended with ... applied to the appellant's case.” Additional Grounds dated 23.11.2023. “6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 29-07-2022 was barred by limitation since it was beyond the surviving timelimit as held

Totalenergies Marketing Services, France vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 3405/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 153Section 274Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law the Assessing Officer has erred in passing the order under Section 148A(d) and issuing the notice under Section 148 after obtaining the approval of the Pr. CIT-27. Mumbai which was not the correct specified authority' as per Section 151 (amended with ... issuing the notice uls. 148. 4.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer has erred in issuing notice under Section 148 although there was no 'information' (as defined in Explanation 1 to Section 148) which was in existence. 5.On the facts and circumstances

The DCIT (Int.Taxa.), Vadodara vs. Shri Ajoy Kanaiyalal Khandheria, Vadodara

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

ITA 451/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.451/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 3337, Nr. Palaiya Mahakali Ward-3 V/S. Mandir Gandhinagar Pethapur, Gandhinagar Gandhinagar – 382 610 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Afepv 3269 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 19/01/2024, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Which Upheld The Order Of The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] Dated 30/12/2019, Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"]. Ranjitsinh Narsinh Vaghela Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 144Section 147Section 148

that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. Consequently, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act and issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on 28/03/2019. In response to the notice under section 148, the assessee filed his return of income on 22/05/2019, declaring ... assessment was completed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act, treating the return of income filed after the issuance of notice under Section 148 as non-compliant due to delayed filing. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) who passed an order dismissing the appeal

Taruna Vatssa, Agra vs. Income Tax Officer, Agra

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

ITA 317/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

verifiable, as the appellant has filed all returns post- retirement after 2002 with his Agra address, even before the initiation of proceedings. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, allegedly issued on 16/03/2020, required the appellant to comply within 30 days from the date of service

M/S Suncity Niketan Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2101/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.2101/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Suncity Niketan Pvt. Ltd………………....….......…....………....Appellant 5, Clive Row, Kolkata -1. [Pan: Aapcs4157E] Vs. Ito, Ward-5(1), Kolkata......................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 07, 2025 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.17,99,28,555/- Made By The Assessing Officer By Treating Credits In The Account Of The Assessee As Income Of The Assessee From Unexplained Sources. The Assessee Apart From Challenging The Validity Of The Additions Made/Confirmed By The Lower Authorities On Merits, Has Also Contested The Very Validity Of The Reopening Of The Assessment Order As Well As The Validity Of The Assessment Order For Want Of Issue Of Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act.

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 250

evidence or without any conclusive proof of any wrong doing on our part. iii. The reasons recorded by you for issue of Notice under section 148 are not your reasons but borrowed satisfaction from Investigation Wing and the re-assessment proceedings based on such borrowed reasons is without jurisdiction, illegal ... which the assessee informed the Assessing Officer that the return originally filed should be treated as the return filed pursuant to the notice under section 148 of the Act. 13. In DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications [2010] 323 ITR 249 (Delhi), this court invalidated a reassessment proceeding

Abishek Kumar, Vadapalani vs. ITO, Non Corporate, Ward 19(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai

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

ITA 2700/CHNY/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2700/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Abishek Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, #32, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Vadapalani Non Corporate Ward 19(3), S.O., Vadapalani, Chennai 600 026. Chennai. [Pan:Aaepa3652L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pawan Chakrapani, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised 13 Grounds In This Appeal & Mainly Challenged The Exparte Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Chakrapani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69

confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 2 I.T.A. No.2761/Chny/24 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and in response to the notice, the assessee filed ITR showing total income

Gnanamorrthy Suresh, Tirupattur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Vellore

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

ITA 2623/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2623/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Gnanamoorthy Suresh,, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 210, Phase 1, Tnhb, Vellore, Ward 2, Tirupattur, Tirupattur H.O. Vellore. Tamil Nadu 635 601. [Pan:Bpcps7016G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Ranga Ramanujam, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Raised 8 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is 2

For Appellant: Shri P. Ranga Ramanujam, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 68

Assessing Officer observed that the assessee made cash deposits amounting to ₹.1,42,53,790/- and no return of income filed. A notice under section 148 of the Act issued and in response to which, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income at ₹.9,71,838/-. The Assessing

T.M. Handlooms Private Limited, Sellur, Madurai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2, Income Tax Office, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2553/CHNY/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2552 & 2553/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 T.M. Handlooms Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 4, Ahimsapuram Fourth Street, Income Tax, Sellur, Madurai 625 002. Corporate Circle 2, Madurai. [Pan:Aabct6418R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 28.11.2023 & 03.11.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

draft assessment order based on the details available on record. In response, the assessee filed its objection by taking a plea that no notice under section 148 of the Act received by it. After disposing the objection of the assessee and by considering the submissions of the Director

T.M Handlooms Private Limited, Sellur, Madurai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-2, Income Tax Office, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2552/CHNY/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2025AY 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

Surya Vanijya P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

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

ITA 2205/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, CIT DR

Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)

Assessment year 2017-18 at Rs. 3,17,776 being the membership fee received from Genpact India Pvt Ltd. Accordingly, the notice under Section 148 of the Act stood issued to the assessee for both the years under consideration. It was pleaded by the ld AR that the notice

Adonis Marketing (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1769/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

could have been issued upto 31.03.2000. Therefore, a valid Return of income was pending as on 15.03.2000. The Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 148 on 15.03.2000 when a valid Return under Section 139(4) was pending. In this case the Return was filed and the same is pending, which ... itself, in Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. vs. ACIT (no. 2) [2004] 266 ITR 664 (All) has observed as under: “It is well settled that notice under section 148 cannot be issued when assessment proceedings are pending vide CIT v. Ranchhoddas Karsondas [1959] 36 ITR 569 (SC), CIT v. S.RamanChettiar

Kumarswamy Gangasharaish Kallur, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1391/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri. E. Shridhar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271BSection 44A

explaining the source of such investment in respect of quantum of the multi commodity exchange transactions. Therefore, the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and reassessment was completed under section 147 of the Act, dated 30.03.2022 and addition was made of Rs.2 ... extended due date for filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. The case was reopened after issue of notice under section 148 of the Act and case was completed under section 147 of the Act on the reason that the assessee has not recorded

Mangla International Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1913/MUM/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2003-04

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing – 12/11/2024

Section 115Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

brief facts are that for the year under consideration, re- assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated, and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 16/12/2005 on the basis that the return of income for the year under consideration was not filed ... from the perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the AO accepted both reasons on the basis of which notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and made no addition thereon. Thus, the reasons for reopening itself do not survive, in the present case

Mangla International Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1912/MUM/2024[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing – 12/11/2024

Section 115Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mangla International Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1911/MUM/2024[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2000-01

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing – 12/11/2024

Section 115Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

Mangla International Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the

ITA 1910/MUM/2024[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 1999-2000

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing – 12/11/2024

Section 115Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

Luxmi Hard Coke Mfg. Co, Dhanbad vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Dhanbad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 102/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153ASection 153BSection 153C

nature. 3. The ld. A.R of the assessee referred to paper book page No. 9 wherein the reasons recorded for issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act has been provided and therein it is clear that search and seizure operation were carried out in the premises

Laxmi Hard Coke Mfg Co., Dhanbad vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Dhanbad

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 101/RAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153ASection 153BSection 153C

Dy. C.I.T. Cir-.2, Nagpur vs. Shri Govinddas Goverdhan Daga, Nagpur

ITA 517/NAG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 147Section 148Section 44A

05/08/2014 E) Perusal of reasons recorded would indicate that they are no valid reasons in the eye of law for which a valid notice under section 148 of I.T. Act 1961 could be issued in the case of assessee. Perusal of reasons recorded would show that there is no reference ... completed in the case of assessee. There is thus no valid satisfaction in the eye of law for escapement of income for which notice under section 148 of I.T. Act 1961 could be issued in the case of assessee. The assessee places reliance on the following decisions for the proposition

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Ajmer vs. Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the C

ITA 1285/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalassistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Ajmer, C. R. Building – 305 001. ..... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Shailesh Mantri, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kumar, CIT, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 254Section 43B

there is any addition or disallowance of any claim is made and as such, on the basis of the same records, issuance of notice under section 148 tantamount to be on the basis of the change of opinion which is impermissible and since the said issue is now well settled