← 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

Nilesh Shamji Bharani, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1787/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal & Shri Satish Kumar, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

satisfied on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a I.T.A. No. 1786/Mum/2023 & Ors. 13 case for the issue of notice under Section 148, need not issue such notice himself." 15. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision would indicate that Section 151 of the Act stipulates ... does not mention any reason for coming to the conclusion that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice under Section 148. We are also of the opinion that the Commissioner has mechanically accorded permission. He did not himself record that he was satisfied that this

Nilesh Shamji Bharani, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1786/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal & Shri Satish Kumar, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

satisfied on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer about fitness of a I.T.A. No. 1786/Mum/2023 & Ors. 13 case for the issue of notice under Section 148, need not issue such notice himself." 15. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision would indicate that Section 151 of the Act stipulates ... does not mention any reason for coming to the conclusion that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice under Section 148. We are also of the opinion that the Commissioner has mechanically accorded permission. He did not himself record that he was satisfied that this

Bhargavi Marketers, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward 6(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 732/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2016-17 Bhargavi Marketers, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aapfb3209D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V. Venkata Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri V. Venkata Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Rani, Sr.A.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 270ASection 40Section 40a

assessment. He further submitted that a show cause was also issued by the Assessing Officer on 10.03.2012 which is to the following effect : “Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 31/03/2021 with DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/148/2020- 21/1032120317(1) was served on you since there exists reasons

Ryan Louis Dcunha, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 35(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5187/MUM/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

income. The AO received information that the assessee has sold immovable property valued at Rs. 59,87,300/-. Accordingly, the AO issued a notice under section 148 and since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the AO completed the assessment under section 147 r.w.s

Quality Construction Co, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 22(3), Mumbai, Piramal Chamber

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

ITA 1403/MUM/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 148

hawala parties without delivery of goods based on examination by Sales Tax Department on the sellers. The AO accordingly Quality Construction Co. issued notice under section 148 re-opening the assessment and completed the assessment by making an addition at 25% of the alleged bogus purchases. On further appeal

R R Paints Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 15(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1112/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

completed on 10.02.2015 assessing the income at Rs.1,06,58,360. Subsequently the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 dated 30.03.2019 for the reason that the assessee has understated the income arising from conversion land to stock in trade towards Long Term Capital Gain

Income Tax Officer-4(3)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan, M K Road vs. Vishal Fashion Private Limited (Earlier Known As M/Raj Ratan Infracon Private Limited), Mumbai

Accordingly the CO of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3893/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

that the said company belongs to a group providing bogus accommodation entries. Accordingly the AO held the said transaction as bogus and issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act (the Act) reopening the assessment of the assessee. The assessee filed the return in response to the notice ... objection for the proposed merger. The ld DR further argued that the assessee filed the return of income in response to notice under section 148 in the name of the merged entity i.e. Raj Ratan Infracon Private Limited on 15.08.2021 and therefore the claim that the merger is brought

Sangeeta Pandey, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-1(4), Lucknow-New

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 564/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Sangeeta Pandey V. The Income Tax Officer House No.88, Majra Andandlok-Ii Ward 1(4) Ganeshpur, Rashmanpur Lucknow - New Chinhat, Lucknow Tan/Pan:Bqepp1354H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vivek Tiwari, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 12 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 04 12 2024 O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.07.2024, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), Requiring The Assessee To File The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. However, The Assessee Did Not File The Return Of Income. The Ao Issued Statutory Notices To The Assessee, Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Various Details Required For Completing The Assessment. However, There Was No Compliance From The Side Of The Assessee. The Ao, Therefore, Proceeded To Complete The Assessment Under

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Tiwari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to file the return of income for the year under

Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society, Ahmedabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 195/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT. D.R
Section 10Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

claim of aforesaid exemption under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act claimed by the assessee, its return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. Accordingly, Principal CIT held that there was an under-assessment of income amounting to Rs. 718,87,11,813, as this

Pushpadevi Shivlal Rathi, Jalna vs. ITO Ward-1, Jalna

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

ITA 1995/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1995/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. Rathi &For Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 197Section 250Section 69A

Judgement). 10. Also further, it was held that the Income-tax Act read with TOLA extended the time limit for issuing reassessment notices under section 148, which fell for completion from 20 March 2020 to 31 March 2021, till 30 June 2021. All the reassessment notices under challenge ... with TOLA will be available to the Revenue to complete the remaining proceedings in furtherance of the deemed notices, including issuance of reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. The surviving or balance time limit can be calculated by computing the number of days between the date

Devi Agro Industries, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 802/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 801/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Devi Agro Industries Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-2 [Pan No.Aaffd9813M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 802/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Devi Agro Industries Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-1 [Pan No.Aaffd9813M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

assessee is in the list enclosed to the letter dated 27/02/2018. Thereupon, the learned Assessing Officer initiated reopening proceedings by issuing notice under section 148, but the assessee did not file return of income in response thereto. 4. Since the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued

Devi Agro Industries, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 801/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 801/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Devi Agro Industries Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-2 [Pan No.Aaffd9813M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent आ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 802/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Devi Agro Industries Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward-1 [Pan No.Aaffd9813M] Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

assessee is in the list enclosed to the letter dated 27/02/2018. Thereupon, the learned Assessing Officer initiated reopening proceedings by issuing notice under section 148, but the assessee did not file return of income in response thereto. 4. Since the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued

Bhairablana Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited, Vill- Hatbele, Post- Hatbele vs. Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 61/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Ground-3. For that in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer, ward-1(1), Burdwan issued notice under section 148 in a unused PAN having wrong status code of "Artificial Juridical Person" instead of correct status code " Association of Persons", and directed your

Smt. Nithya Govindarajan, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-1(3), Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 1687/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Ms.L.Sweety, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153(1)Section 2

recomputation shall be made under section 147 after the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the notice under section 148 was served: [Provided that where the notice under section 148 is served on or after the 1st day of April, 2019, the provisions

ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Vastimal Bhim Raj Sancheti, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 441/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth GS, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 68

outstanding as on 31.03.2015. Accordingly, after recording reasons and duly following the procedure for reopening for reassessment, the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and in response, assessee filed return of income on 17.01.2022. Subsequently, the other statutory notices were issued to the assessee

ACIT, Circle 2(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Vastimal Bhim Raj Sancheti, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 440/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth GS, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 68

outstanding as on 31.03.2015. Accordingly, after recording reasons and duly following the procedure for reopening for reassessment, the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and in response, assessee filed return of income on 17.01.2022. Subsequently, the other statutory notices were issued to the assessee

Chaitalee Sachin Deokar, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, -It -2, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2806/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Zahid Hasan Khan, Yamuna Nagar vs. ITO, Ward -5, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, ground no. 4 of the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 122/CHANDI/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 250Section 54BSection 54F

gains on amounting to Rs. 2,49,21,043/- in the hands of the assessee. In noted that the AO had issued two notices under section 148 of the sale of land his case, it is Act. In terms of reasons recorded before issuance of the first notice under section ... Realters Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi for Rs. 2,14,72,500/- on 18/04/2006. In terms of the reasons recorded before issuance of second notice under section 148 on 21/25.03.2014, the AO no that the assessee has sold another piece of his agriculture land situated Vilage Kansapur measuring 8 Kanal

Income Tax Officer-1(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Masumi Overseas Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 2020/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon'Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri R R Makwana, Sr DRFor Respondent: Shri Tejveer Singh
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69

income, respondent had purchased immoveable property for Rs.4,78,00,000/-. In such circumstances, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the said Act on 30.03.2021. In response thereto, respondent did not file any RoI but submitted statement of computation of income offering

Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue

ITA 516/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 516/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Vs Income Tax Officer, Village Mirzapur Hardet Haveli Ward-1(4), Mujehri, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepy4744P Assessee By : Sh. M. K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A), Faridabad Dated 28.11.2019 In Case No. 10339/2018-19 In Proceedings U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

Section 13(1)(d) of the Act., for such reason the assessment was reopened under Section 147 of the Act by issuance of notice under Section 148 dated 13.03.2016. Subsequently, notices under Section 143(2) and Section 142(1) were issued. Pursuant to such notices the assessee through their authorized ... Income Tax (Appeals), 25, Kolkata (CIT(A)) contending that the entire proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act after service of notice under Section 148, is illegal, ab-initio, void and bad in law. It was contended that there was no failure on the part of the assessee