← 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

DCIT Central Circle- 7(1), Mumbai vs. Bhavik Prafulchandra Vora, Gujrat

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7602/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

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

grossly erred in not adjudicating the ground relating to the validity of the reassessment proceeding despite the fact that the Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 30.07.2022 is void and bad in law as it was issued without DIN 5. In law and in the facts and circumstances ... assessments. The provision imposes a responsibility on the Revenue to ensure that it obtains the sanction of the specified authority before issuing a notice under section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assessees from harassment resulting from the mechanical 6 I.T.A. No. 7602/Mum/2025

DCIT Central Circle- 7(1), Mumbai vs. Pranavkumar Prafulchandra Vora, Gujrat

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7596/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 68

grossly erred in not adjudicating the ground relating to the validity of the reassessment proceeding despite the fact that the Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 28.07.2022 is void and bad in law as it was issued without DIN. 5. In law and on the facts ... Revenue to 6 I.T.A. No. 7596/Mum/2025 C.O. No. 22/Mum/2026 ensure that it obtains the sanction of the specified authority before issuing a notice under section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assessees from harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments Sri krishna

Surat Goods Transport Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 16(2), Mumbai

ITA 7556/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 154Section 68

assessee submitted that the present case pertains to AY 2018-19 for which the reassessment proceedings are initiated by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 07.04.2022, accordingly, the re-opening was initiated after three years from the end of relevant assessment year, therefore, the approval ... prayer that the approval under section 148 was granted by PCIT in the present case as apparent from the notice under section 148 dated 07.04.2022 placed before us in the PB at page no. 26, wherein the approval was given by PCIT, Mumbai-8 on 07.04.2022 vide Reference

Rasila Lalitkumar Cholera, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

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

ITA 7544/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69Section 69C

information with regard to tax evasion on share transactions involving one M/s SVC Resources Limited during the relevant period, justifying the issuance of notice under Section 148. The AO described the appellant's modus operandi, noting unusual stock price increases without financial basis and conducted investigations, including issuing summons

Chetan Shashikant Thakkar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 27(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7320/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Vishal D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (Sr. DR)
Section 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

appeal are as under: On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dt. 30.03.2021 which is bad in law and without jurisdiction and has to be quashed and set aside

Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son & Legal Heir Subodh Vijay Mahajan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6755/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi SolaniFor Respondent: Shri Sushil B. Shendge (SR. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

assessee filed the return dated 10-08-2013 by declaring total income 1,46,46,858/-. Thereafter the Ld. AO issued notice under section 148 on 31-03- 2021 and commenced re-assessment proceedings. Finally the assessment was completed on 30-03-2022 under section 147 read with section 144B ... perused the material available on record. The assessee filed the return of income, and the assessment was completed pursuant to issuance of notice under section 148 and framed under Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son and Legal Heir Mr. Subodh Vijay Mahajan sections 147 read with section 144B of the Income

Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son and Legal Heir Subodh Vijay Mahajan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6754/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi SolaniFor Respondent: Shri Sushil B. Shendge (SR. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

assessee filed the return dated 10-08-2013 by declaring total income 1,46,46,858/-. Thereafter the Ld. AO issued notice under section 148 on 31-03- 2021 and commenced re-assessment proceedings. Finally the assessment was completed on 30-03-2022 under section 147 read with section 144B ... perused the material available on record. The assessee filed the return of income, and the assessment was completed pursuant to issuance of notice under section 148 and framed under Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son and Legal Heir Mr. Subodh Vijay Mahajan sections 147 read with section 144B of the Income

Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son and Legal Heir Subodh Vijay Mahajan, Thane vs. DCIT, Circle 3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6753/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi SolaniFor Respondent: Shri Sushil B. Shendge (SR. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

assessee filed the return dated 10-08-2013 by declaring total income 1,46,46,858/-. Thereafter the Ld. AO issued notice under section 148 on 31-03- 2021 and commenced re-assessment proceedings. Finally the assessment was completed on 30-03-2022 under section 147 read with section 144B ... perused the material available on record. The assessee filed the return of income, and the assessment was completed pursuant to issuance of notice under section 148 and framed under Vijay Dattatray Mahajan Through Son and Legal Heir Mr. Subodh Vijay Mahajan sections 147 read with section 144B of the Income

Rajendra P Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 24(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee

ITA 6545/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Rajendra P. Shah, Ito, Ward-24(3)(5), Mumbai 402, Anand Enclave Chs, Tps 3, 11Th Vs Kautilya Bhawan, Mumbai, Road, Santacruz (East), Maharashtra – 400051. Mumbai – 400055. [Pan No. Aydps7704A] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

stock scrip of Mind Vision Capital Ltd. during F.Y. 2011-12. The assessing officer after recording the reasons about escapement of income issued notice under section 148 to the assessee. (Date of notice under section 148 is not mentioned in the order). In response to such show cause notice

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Thane vs. Shree Developer, Bhayander, Dist- Thane

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6236/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane West, Mumbai- 400604 ............... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Unit-7(2), Mumbai, that the assessee has availed loan from companies which are engaged in providing accommodation entries on a commission basis, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 30/03/2019, and the proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. As per the information received

Dattatray Vithoba Sawant, Kalyan vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-42(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6081/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 10(14)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 3Section 80CSection 80G

assessments. The provision imposes a responsibility on the Revenue to ensure that it obtains the sanction of the specified authority before issuing a notice under section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assessees from harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments Sri krishna ... year. Thus, non-compliance by the assessing officer with the strict time limits prescribed under section 151 affects their jurisdiction to issue a notice under section 148. 77. Parliament enacted TOLA to ensure that the interests of the Revenue are not defeated because the assessing officer could not comply with

Pentokey Organy Organ (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Comm. of Income Tax, Circle 1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2651/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailpentokey Organy (India) Ltd. 45/47, Somaiya Bhavan, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai. ............... Appellant Pan: Aaacp6875D V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle - 1(2)(1), ……………… Respondent Room No.535, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020 Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, Adv. Shri Om Kandalkar Revenue By : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234Section 250

substantiating the genuineness and reasonableness of these payments to related parties, reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated, and a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 23.03.2021. After considering the submissions of the assessee during the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“AO”), vide ... from the perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the AO accepted the reasons on the basis of which notice under section 148 was issued and made no addition thereon. Thus, the reasons for reopening the assessment do not survive, in the present case, in view

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2569/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

reassessment is not duly served upon, making the assessment proceeding void, ab initio. 2. The learned CIT has not considered that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is without proper jurisdiction and non-est, and consequently invalid. Hence, the order passed under Section 144 r.w.s ... assessee at Rs. 2,17,770/-. Subsequently the case of assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act by issuance of notice under section 148 on 24.03.2014. During the entire reopening assessment proceedings, the assessee remained silent with no compliance to the queries raised by the ld. AO vide

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2568/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

reassessment is not duly served upon, making the assessment proceeding void, ab initio. 2. The learned CIT has not considered that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is without proper jurisdiction and non-est, and consequently invalid. Hence, the order passed under Section 144 r.w.s ... assessee at Rs. 2,17,770/-. Subsequently the case of assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act by issuance of notice under section 148 on 24.03.2014. During the entire reopening assessment proceedings, the assessee remained silent with no compliance to the queries raised by the ld. AO vide

Kanti Prasad Finvest Private Limited, Delhi vs. Ward 14(1), Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2928/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Bhanu Mandal, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

r.w.s. 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The facts leading to the case is that the first notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.06.2021 and as per TOLA the extended limitation period was dated 30.06.2021. Therefore, the surviving period was three days ... factual aspect. Thus, having regard to the facts involved in the matter and the judgements passed by different forums as indicate hereinabove, the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.07.2022 is found to be barred by limitation and the same is, thus, liable to be quashed

Kanti Prasad Finvest Private Limited, Delhi vs. Ward 14 (1), Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2927/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Madhumita Roy & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Bhanu Mandal, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

r.w.s. 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The facts leading to the case is that the first notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.06.2021 and as per TOLA the extended limitation period was dated 30.06.2021. Therefore, the surviving period was three days ... factual aspect. Thus, having regard to the facts involved in the matter and the judgements passed by different forums as indicate hereinabove, the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.07.2022 is found to be barred by limitation and the same is, thus, liable to be quashed

Sandeep Kapur, Gurugram vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2866/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 3Section 69A

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

Satyaprem Rajabhau Dhole, Beed vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 368/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rathi (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 144B(1)(ix)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2

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

Rajendrakumar Shrishrimal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3282/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3282/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rajendrakumar Shrishrimal, V The Income Tax Officer, 685/3, Anant Vashat, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Bibwewadi, Pune – 411037. Pan: Bjsps9226G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhilash Hiran Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 11/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T.Act, 1961 Dated 03.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

time barred 11 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned AO erred in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 27 July 2022 for AY 2017-18 is time barred after taking into consideration the surviving period for the reassessment notices ... obtaining the approval from the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-Pune-3 under section 151(i) of the Act while issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 27 July 2022 instead of obtaining approval from the learned Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax under section

Santhosh Abraham, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kancheepuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3950/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3950/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & S.A. No. 137/Chny/2025 [In Ita No. 3950/Chny/2025] Shri Santhosh Abraham, The Income Tax Officer, 21, Morrison 2Nd Street, Vs. Ward 1, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016. Kancheepuram. Pan: Aijpa 0742L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N.Sai Sathiyabama, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri N.Sai Sathiyabama, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 270Section 270ASection 274

submit. d. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department ought to have invalidated the entire proceedings since the notice under section 148 dated 06.03.2024 and the notice under section 270 A dated 15.01.2025 were issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by the Faceless Accessing Officer