“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, Ashar It Park, Thane vs. Hemlata Sunil Phopalkar, Thane East

ITA 5190/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Hemlata Sunil Phopalkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 46A(3)Section 69

immovable property for a consideration of Rs. 1,16,00,000/- during the financial year 2017-18. Therefore, the AO issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) reopening the assessment of the assessee. Since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued

Mr Nagarajan Chandrashekhar, Mumbai vs. International Tax Ward-2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4100/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Modi, CA (Virtually appear)

Section 10(10)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

financial transaction to the tune of Rs. 1,39,53,187/- during the FY relevant to AY 2016-17, the AO issued a notice under section 148. The assessee filed a response providing details of the various income received by him during the year under consideration. The AO completed ... income due to which the Mr. Nagarajan Chandrashekhar proceedings under section 147 of the Act is initiated. The assessee in response to notice under section 148 of the Act filed the details of various incomes /receipts received during the year under consideration. The AO while completing the assessment made addition

DCIT It 3 3 2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Pramarica Aspf II Cyprus Holding Ltd, Ctprus

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3041/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/ Shri YogeshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115A(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 148

India at 10% under Article 10 of India-Cyprus DTAA. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently a notice under section 148 dated 29.11.2018 was issued and the final order of assessment under section 143(1) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act was passed ... consequently the assessment order passed by the AO got vitiated. The AO subsequently initiated the 2nd round of reassessment proceedings, 4. by issuing notice under section 148 on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed the return of income on 26.04.2021. The assessee filed objections to the reopening

DCIT It 332 Mumbai, Income Tax vs. Pramarica Aspf II Cyprus Holding Ltd, Cyprus

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3040/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/ Shri YogeshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115A(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 148

Archana, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Patna

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

ITA 338/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 69A

case was reopened under section 147 on the basis of information received from the DDIT(Inv), Patna and the notice under section 148 of the Act was Page 3 of 9 I.T.A. No.338/PAT/2023, AY: 2013-14 Archana. issued after obtaining due approval from the competent authority. The Assessing Officer added

Kishore Singh Shekhawat, Bjs Colony Jodhpur vs. ITO, WD-1(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 230/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Jodhpur. 16701587087 ICICI Bank Ltd., Rs. 755000/- Jodhpur. Total : Rs. 1,09,28,800/- The case of the assessee was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 on 31.03.2021 under a reasonable belief that the income has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions ... section 147 of the Act, 1961 after recording the reasons. In response to the notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 the assessee has failed to file his return of income. Since no response has been made to the notice under section 148

Madurai Tuticorin Expressways Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

ITA 1143/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

SNSR Chinmai, Advocate, the Ld. AR, submitted that both the impugned order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 24.04.2022 and Notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 25.04.2022 issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), i.e., outside the faceless mechanism as provided under the provisions ... Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022", it is only the “Faceless Assessing Officer” (FAO) who can issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act and not the “Jurisdictional Assessing Officer” (JAO), and the assessments are statutorily required to be as per the prescribed faceless mechanism provided under

Viswanadh Kandula, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1085/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1084 To 1088 & 1027/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20) M/S Ace Tyres (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aadca2210N Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothese Six Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Six Separate Orders Dated 29/05/2025, 30/05/2025, 04/06/2025, 096/06/2025, 17/06/2025 & 14/07/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Arising From The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act, Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations U/S 132 Of The Act, Dated 04/01/2023 In Case Of Exel Group Of Companies Including The Assessee For The A.Ys 2014-15 To 2019-20 Respectively. Since Common Issues Are Raised In These Group Of Six Appeals Arising From Same Facts & Search & Seizure Operation, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience, All Page 1 Of 78

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Tyres P Ltd grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. Modified Ground No.7 On the facts and circumstance of the case, sanction under Section 151 of the Act, has been granted mechanically and without ... Section 149(1)(b)(iii). Accordingly grant of sanction is liable to be declared as nullity and invalid and resultantly, impugned notice under Section 148 is bad in law. 8. On the facts and circumstance of the case, Learned CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.7

Iswar Chand Dubey, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-68 (1), Delhi

ITA 2985/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 151Section 2(22)(e)

assessment, without issue of notice under Section 129 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on change of incumbent. ii) That the notice under Section 148 dated 28.03.2011 was issued by ITO Mr. M.R. Aggarwal, while all subsequent proceedings were conducted by ITO Mr. Pradeep Dutta, without intimating the change ... assessment of that year. Both these conditions were conditions precedent to be satisfied before the AO could have jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 read with section 147(a). But under the substituted section 147 existence of only the first condition suffices. In other words

Punit Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-36(2), Delhi

ITA 2983/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 151Section 2(22)(e)

People Tree Chits Private Limited, Chamarajpet vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2270/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. R. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. V. Parithivel, JCIT

Section 115BSection 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 249Section 249(4)Section 250Section 69A

Bangalore Page 3 of 7 company had neither furnished any return under section 139 of the Act nor in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. Even, during the course of the assessment proceeding, the assessee had also not furnished any adequate reply to the statutory notices issued

Pallavi Pal, Noida vs. Ward 5(2)(1), Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, Gautam Budh Nagar

Accordingly, Revenue’s appeal in this case is dismissed

ITA 4657/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahayita No.4657/Del/2019 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Shri Vijay Shankar Ward-66(4), Bajpai, New Delhi. Vs. 104, Riico Ind. Area, School Of Aeronautics Delhi Jaipur Highway, Neemrana, Rajsthan-301705. Pan-Aeppb6550D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rahul Bardia, Ca Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/08/2025

Section 147Section 148Section 253(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

Question of law 2. Admit. The question of law framed for consideration is: Whether the ITAT was correct in holding that since notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (the Act) was not served on the Assessee in accordance with law, the re-assessment made consequent thereto ... High Court is as under: "Service of notice a jurisdictional requirement 24. The Court first would like to deal with the question whether notice under Section 148 of the Act is a jurisdictional requirement. The relevant portion of Section 148 (1) reads as under: "148. Issue of notice where income

Yogesh Ashok Mundade, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, 11(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5084/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh M. Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Sr. D/R

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69A

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; I.T.A. No. 5084/Mum/2024 4 d. TOLA does not extend the life of the old regime. It merely ... 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

Shri Chetan Sharma, Kanpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Hari Singh Chouhan V. The Income Tax Officer 3(5) 1, Naramau Kanpur Kanpur Nagar (U.P) Tan/Pan:Askpc3749A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Srhi Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Srhi Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 55A

accordingly reopened the case of the assessee under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) after issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. In response to notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee’s Counsel appeared before the AO and filed

ACIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata vs. Hi Tech Systems and Services Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1318/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

section as it stood immediately before its substitution by the Finance Act, 2016.The ld AR submitted that for the assessment year 1992-93 notice under section 148 was issued prior to June 1, 2016, but in terms of the aforesaid proviso, no order could be passed because of the stay ... respect of notices served during the financial year 1999-2000 can be applied in a case where the notice under section 148 of the Act was served during any other period came up for consideration before ITC LIMITED; A.Ys. 1992-93 & 1993-94 ITA Nos.1343& 1318/KOL/2023, 744 & 745/KOL/2024

Cyient Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above observation

ITA 913/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.913/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Ankit Jain Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Agwpa4459K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A(1)Section 292CSection 69

under section 148 and the order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that the notice under section 148 as well as the order under section 148A(d) of the Act were issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (“JAO”) instead ... CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022, issued under section 151A(1) and (2) of the Act, mandates that with effect from 29.03.2022, all notices under section 148 of the Act must be issued through the Faceless Assessment Unit. Relying on the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court

Parvinder Kaur Sawhney, Gurgaon vs. Pr, CIT, Delhi -12, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA No

ITA 626/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vohra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Kumar Govila, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 153Section 234ASection 234B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN

K K Spun India Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-2 New Delhi, Jhandewalan Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2006/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the reopening of the reassessment proceedings despite the fact that notice under section 148 has been issued beyond three years without there being any books of accounts, evidence or other documents in the possession ... fact that the order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 has been passed ignoring the first proviso to section 148 which provides that notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless there is "information" [as defined under Explanation 1 to section 148] with the assessing officer which suggests that income

K K Spun India Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Jhandewalan Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2005/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 14tSection 250Section 271Section 69A

Power Links Transmission Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4599/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Powerlinks, Transmission Ltd. Vs Additional 10Th Floor, Dlf Tower-A, Commissioner Of District Centre, Jasola, Income Tax, Spl. Range New Delhi. 7 New Delhi Pan No. Aabct7775M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3ASection 80I

Assessing officer was deleted by the Ld CIT(A). Thereafter, the case of the assessee company was re-opened and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer re-computed the income under the normal provision of the Act. During the original assessment the assessing company