← 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

Asis Kumar Bhattacharyya, Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Burdwan

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

ITA 1518/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1518/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Asis Kumar Bhattacharyya,…………...……Appellant Town Hall, Post, Police Station & Dist. Purba Burdwan, Pin Code No. 713101, W.B. [Pan:Bnzpb8793A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………...Respondent Ward-1(1), Burdwan, Aayakar Bhawan, Court Compound, Burdwan-713101, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri P.K. Ray, Advocate & Shri H. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Addl. Cit & Shri L.N. Das, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 11, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 139Section 147Section 148

alongwith other co-owners. Accordingly, proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case of assesese and issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 07.03.2018 and duly served on the assessee. The assesee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.96

Sandeep Vimalchand Gadia, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(5), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2404/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. Chaitanya A. V. Mudrabettu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 148Section 194CSection 69A

Page 3 of 5 assessee’s bank account and it was also found that the assessee has not filed return of income. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 28.03.2019, was issued and served to the assessee and thereafter several opportunities were granted to the assessee and other

Mr. D K Shivakumar, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore

ITA 205/BANG/2022[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Chandrasekhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 153ASection 153C

Representative (DR) relied on the order of the AO and submitted that on the basis of seized documents the AO has correctly issued notice under section 148 for completing assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The assessment orders are passed before the amendment to section 153C ... searches conducted on 02/09/2010 & 10/10/2013. Consequently, the case of the assessee came to be centralized on 03/07/2012. The AO has issued a notice under section 148 after the date of centralization. The time limit to initiate proceedings under section 153C for each of the assessment years from Assessment Year

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore vs. Mr. D K Shivakumar, Bangalore

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

ITA 48/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

Section 153ASection 153C

Representative (DR) relied on the order of the AO and submitted that on the basis of seized documents the AO has correctly issued notice under section 148 for completing assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The assessment orders are passed before the amendment to section 153C ... searches conducted on 02/09/2010 & 10/10/2013. Consequently, the case of the assessee came to be centralized on 03/07/2012. The AO has issued a notice under section 148 after the date of centralization. The time limit to initiate proceedings under section 153C for each of the assessment years from Assessment Year

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore vs. Mr. D K Shivakumar, Bangalore

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

ITA 47/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

Section 153ASection 153C

Representative (DR) relied on the order of the AO and submitted that on the basis of seized documents the AO has correctly issued notice under section 148 for completing assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The assessment orders are passed before the amendment to section 153C ... searches conducted on 02/09/2010 & 10/10/2013. Consequently, the case of the assessee came to be centralized on 03/07/2012. The AO has issued a notice under section 148 after the date of centralization. The time limit to initiate proceedings under section 153C for each of the assessment years from Assessment Year

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore vs. Mr. D K Shivakumar, Bangalore

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

ITA 46/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

Section 153ASection 153C

Representative (DR) relied on the order of the AO and submitted that on the basis of seized documents the AO has correctly issued notice under section 148 for completing assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The assessment orders are passed before the amendment to section 153C ... searches conducted on 02/09/2010 & 10/10/2013. Consequently, the case of the assessee came to be centralized on 03/07/2012. The AO has issued a notice under section 148 after the date of centralization. The time limit to initiate proceedings under section 153C for each of the assessment years from Assessment Year

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(4), Bangalore vs. Mr. D K Shivakumar, Bangalore

ITA 45/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

For Respondent: Shri. Chandrasekhar, AR
Section 153ASection 153C

Representative (DR) relied on the order of the AO and submitted that on the basis of seized documents the AO has correctly issued notice under section 148 for completing assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. The assessment orders are passed before the amendment to section 153C ... searches conducted on 02/09/2010 & 10/10/2013. Consequently, the case of the assessee came to be centralized on 03/07/2012. The AO has issued a notice under section 148 after the date of centralization. The time limit to initiate proceedings under section 153C for each of the assessment years from Assessment Year

Asia Investment Corporation (Mauritius) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Taxation)1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2766/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

were involved in manipulation and obtaining of illegitimate capital gains/losses, wherein assessee was identified to be one of the beneficiaries. 2.2. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the act was issued on 13/06/2021. Subsequently, in light of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ashish Aggarwal ... thus completed the procedure and an order under section 148A(d) was issued to the assessee on 23/06/2022 as a consequence of which notice under section 148 of the act was issued on 23/06/2022 for assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18. Subsequently notice under section 142(1) was issued

Asia Investment Corporation (Mauritius ) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Tax)-1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2765/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

were involved in manipulation and obtaining of illegitimate capital gains/losses, wherein assessee was identified to be one of the beneficiaries. 2.2. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the act was issued on 13/06/2021. Subsequently, in light of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ashish Aggarwal ... thus completed the procedure and an order under section 148A(d) was issued to the assessee on 23/06/2022 as a consequence of which notice under section 148 of the act was issued on 23/06/2022 for assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18. Subsequently notice under section 142(1) was issued

Vishwa Glass and Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2547/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K.C. ThackerFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Umap, CIT-DR
Section 127(2)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

Investigation Report, the assessee has obtained accommodation entries from Shri Jignesh Shah to the extent of Rs.1,15,58,838/-. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021 and proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. In response to the notice issued under section ... Shri Sanjay Shah the assessee is a beneficiary of accommodation entry transaction pertaining to a fictitious loan amount to Rs.1,15,58,838/-, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2021 and proceeded under section 147 of the Act were initiated. We find that during

Vishwa Glass and Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2546/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri K.C. ThackerFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Umap, CIT-DR
Section 127(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

commission for accommodation entries and also availed term loans to the tune of Rs.3,69,30,611/-, genuineness of which was doubted, notice under section 148 was issued on 26.03.2021 and proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. In response to the notice issued under section 148 ... under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 (“VSV Scheme, 2020”) and discharged the entire disputed tax liability. The assessee further submitted once again notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2021 and the assessment order was passed on 29.03.2022 making a similar addition and assessing the total

Vishnubhai Chelabhai Patel, Surat vs. PCIT, Surat-1, Surat

In the result, ground of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 421/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Physical Hearing) Vishnubhai Chelabhai Patel, Pr.C.I.T.,Surat-1, F-19, Divya Jyoti Apartment, Surat. Vs. Samul Dairy Road, Alkapuri, Surat-395008 (Gujarat) Pan No. Adipp 4007 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263Section 50C

crore). On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer after recording reasons under Section 147 of the Act and issued notice under section 148 to the assessee. The Assessing Officer recorded that after considering the reply of assessee, he accepted the returned income in the assessment order dated 16/03/2022 ... purpose of registration of transaction at Rs. 1.35 crore. The Assessing Officer after recording reasons under Section 147 of the Act and issued notice under section 148 to the assessee. The Assessing Officer recorded that after considering the reply of assessee, he accepted the returned income in the assessment order

Tijaria Polypipes Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cirlce 4, Jaipur

ITA 616/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

asked to produce the record to establish as to whether the impugned assessment order and the aforesaid objection of the petitioner against notice under section 148 of the Act was considered and disposed of or not to which Mr. Bhattacharjee could not produce any specific record to show that before ... matter is remanded back to the assessing officer concerned to first dispose of the aforesaid objection of the petitioner against impugned notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act by passing a reasoned and speaking order and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised

Jarnail Singh, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 395/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 263

transaction in penny scrip amounting to Rs. 1,92,325/-, reasons for escapement of income were recorded by ITO, Bilaspur and notice under section 148 was issued on 28/03/2018 after receiving necessary approval from the ld PCIT, Shimla. In response to the notice, the assessee filed his return of income ... transactions amounting to Rs. 8,29,99,66,819/-, thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 28.03.2018. In response to the said notice

Jarnail Singh, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 394/CHANDI/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 263

transaction in penny scrip amounting to Rs. 1,92,325/-, reasons for escapement of income were recorded by ITO, Bilaspur and notice under section 148 was issued on 28/03/2018 after receiving necessary approval from the ld PCIT, Shimla. In response to the notice, the assessee filed his return of income ... transactions amounting to Rs. 8,29,99,66,819/-, thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 and notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 28.03.2018. In response to the said notice

Same Deutz Fahr Italia Spa, Italy vs. Assistant Commissioner, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 937/CHNY/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 250o

Assessing Officer erred in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act. 2.2 The Assessing Officer having issued reopening notice under section 148 under the old provisions ought not to have continued and completed the reassessment proceedings post amendment of such provisions with effect from 1 April

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Macmillan Education India Private Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2036/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 2036/Chny/2024 & Co No.: 66/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Income Tax Officer, Macmillan Education India Corporate Ward -4(1), V. Private Limited, Chennai – 600 034. No.21, Patullos Road, Chennai – 600 002. [Pan:Aafcm-5564-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Mr. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate : Ms. R. Anita, Addl.Cit Department By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 22.11.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 147

scrutiny assessment, the assessment was completed vide order dated 15.12.2016 without any additions/disallowances and by accepting the returned income as total income. Subsequently, Notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 was issued and the reasons recorded (refer page 124 to 128 at page 137) are as follows: "Based ... tangible material, when the time for scrutiny assessment has elapsed on 31.3.2001, prior to issue of notice u/s.148. The notice under section 148 dated 9.12.2002 is thus an arbitrary exercise of power and a review of proceedings impermissible in law. 13. The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court

Income Tax Officer, Kautaliya Bhavan, Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

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

ITA 4378/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

issued within the limitations provided. The relevant provision during the period is reproduced as under: “S. 149. Time limit for notice. [1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,— (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless ... Тахтап 963/[2003] 259 ITR 19, wherein it has been held as under:- "However, we clarify 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 he so desires, to seek reasons

Income Tax Officer 41(3)(3), Bkc vs. Rajnish Bharti HUF, Darukhana

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

ITA 4377/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. C.V. JainFor Respondent: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

issued within the limitations provided. The relevant provision during the period is reproduced as under: “S. 149. Time limit for notice. [1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,— (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless ... Taxman 963/[2003] 259 ITR 19, wherein it has been held as under:- "However, we clarify 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 he so desires, to seek reasons

Rajnish Bharti HUF, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer 20(3)(1), Mumbai, Lalbaug

In the result, both the appeals of the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed assessee are dismissed whereas appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3941/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. C.V. Jain
Section 143(3)Section 148

provision during the period is uring the period is reproduced as under: reproduced as under: “S. 149. Time limit for notice. [1) No notice under section 148 149. Time limit for notice. [1) No notice under section 148 149. Time limit for notice. [1) No notice under section 148 shall ... wherein it has been held as , wherein it has been held as under:- "However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of "However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of "However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of the Income