“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

Sms Tolls and Developers, Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 348/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

response to which, the assessee requested to treat the original return filed on 30/08/2011, as the return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. During the relevant previous year, the assessee received Inter Corporate Deposit (ICD) of ` 107,70,00,000, from SMS Shivnath Infrastructure

Vijay Vinod Duragkar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 339/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

derived under the heads “income from house property”, “income from business & profession” and “income from other sources”. The case was re–opened and notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was issued on 20/03/2020. The assessee, while 3 Vijaya Vinod Duragkar responding to the notice ... vide her letter dated 30/03/2021, submitted that she having already filed her return of income disclosing all relevant details, the notice under section 148 of the Act is illegal and invalid and hence requested the Assessing Officer to drop the same. However, in order to make statutory compliance

Panache Dealtrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T., Central - 2, Kolkata

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

ITA 977/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 977/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Panache Dealtrade Pvt. Limited,…….………Appellant 1St Floor, Rup Chand Roy Street, Kolkata-700007, West Bengal [Pan:Aagcp0699B] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kolkata-2,………………………………..………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit(D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151Section 263Section 263(1)

which has rendered the assessment so framed as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The ld. A.R. submitted that the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 20.03.2020 was issued by the ld. Assessing Officer after taking prior approval under section 151 of the Act from ... Panache Dealtrade Pvt. Limited argued that the issue was duly and fully examined by the ld. Assessing Officer before issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. Ld. A.R. further submitted that before recording the reasons all the transactions were verified and therefore were not part of the reasons recorded

Glasseye Traders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1485/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under the section; and (\n) though the notice under section 148(2) does not include a particular issue with respect to which income has escaped assessment, yet he may nonetheless, assess or reassess the income ... Parliament, it is clear that upon formation of a reason to believe under section 147 and following the issuance of a notice under section 148, the Assessing Officer has the power to assess or reassess the Page 4 of 6 I.T.A. No.: 1485/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Glasseye Traders

Talha Khan, Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha vs. Addl.Jt.Dy.ACIT.NFAC, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3419/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2017-18 Talha Khan, Vs. National Faceless Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha, Appeal Centre (Nfac), Amroha-244221 Delhi Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Ejspk7379K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148Section 271FSection 69A

that appellant filed return of income along with audit report in form 3CB and 3CD on 26.4.2021 on IT portal in compliance of notice under section 148 dated 30.3.3021 and the AO has mentioned reply of appellant in his assessment order dated 29.3.2022 in para no. 4 "however, the assessee

Shila Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(2), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 966/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Royshila Builders & Vs. Ito, Ward 23(2) Developers Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Flat No. 50, Aakshardham Apptt., Pocket-3, Dwarka Sector- 19, New Delhi-110075 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaics0470K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

reopened under Section 147 of the Act after recording reasons and due approval of authorities in terms of Section 151 of the Act. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 11.03.2016 which was duly served upon the assessee. In fact, from the reason recorded as provided

Arshad Mahmood Khan, Lucknow vs. ITO-2(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 622/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2014-15 Arshad Mahmood Khan V. Ito-2(1) Flat No.500, Windsor Court-Iii Lucknow 93H, Dalibagh Ganna Sansthan Lucknow Tan/Pan:Ajpk0388G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Arshad Mahmood Khan (Assessee) Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12 11 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 14 11 2024 O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.08.2024, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Income Tax Department Had Received Information That The Assessee Had Made High Value Transaction During The Year Under Consideration & That There Were Credit Entries Of Rs.31,14,885/- In The Assessee’S Bank Account No.26231930000676 & Of Rs.15,49,850/- In Bank Account

For Appellant: Shri Arshad Mahmood Khan (Assessee)For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 274Section 69Section 69A

Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) after issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. Since no return of income had been filed by the assessee in response to the said notice, the AO issued

Maxis Mobile Services Sdn. Bhd., Malaysia vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2)(1), International Taxation

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

ITA 2746/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 148Section 149Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 56

case and in law, the learned AO has erred in recognizing cellular roaming charges as "asset" and accordingly erred in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 1.4 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the amount of income escaping assessment is less than ... relevant assessment year since the notice issued for post June 2021. Hence, the orders issued under Section 148A(d) and the notice under Section 148 of the amended 1961 Act, for AY 2016-17 and AY 2017- 18 are not valid.” 12. In view of the above

Sachin Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 47(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3246/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roysachin Jain Vs. Ito,Ward-47(2) 1732, Mz Floor, Nayi Drumshape Building, Basti, Naya Bazar, Delhi- 110002 Delhi – 110006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aijpj5875F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Ward-47(2) 2. On the basis of AIR information proceeding under Section 147 of the Act was initiated against the assessee and notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.03.2019 was served upon the assessee followed by notice under Section 142(1) dated 16.08.2019 alongwith the detailed questionnaire

Naresh Kumar, Bhiwani vs. ITO Ward-1, Bhiwani

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

ITA 2633/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 144Section 148

basis of information of higher authority without applying the mind and therefore the assessment proceeding is against Law. 2. That the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was not served on the assessee in accordance with law and the assessment made consequent thereto is able

Sh.Randhir Singh, Mohali vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

ITA 37/CHANDI/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 253Section 263

compliance to NMS letter for the period under reference, the proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were initiated and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 27.03.2017. 4. That in compliance to the aforesaid notice Shri Raj Kukreja Advocate attended

Harpreet Kaur Kaushik Manek, Bhavnagar vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 109/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

reasons were recorded and subsequently the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after recording reasons and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 28.03.2018 after taking approval from the PCIT on 27.03.2018. In response to the notice under Section 148

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. N K Proteins Pvt. Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 339/AHD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 43(5)

escaped assessment which comes to his light during the course of his assessment proceedings which was not mentioned in the reason for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act. In a notice for reassessment which has been issued beyond a period of four years from the end of relevant

DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Chnnamaneni Infra Private Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 880/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaassessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Chnnamaneni Infra Private Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaecc2707P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Rajendra Prasad, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Y. Srikanth Reddy, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 07.11.2024 12.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri T. Rajendra Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Y. Srikanth Reddy, Sr.AR

Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 68

defective return’. Hence, Assessing Officer opined that there was an escapement of Assessment for the Financial Year 2013 – 2014 and notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 was issued on 06th April 2021. In reply, assessee explained the sources of investment and also filed confirmation letters from

Changaai Mangalote Ibrahim, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, assessee's appeal stands allowed

ITA 1405/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Sri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

cited (supra) has held as follows: “2. The primary ground that has been raised is that the Income- tax Officer who issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, had no jurisdiction to issue such notice. According to Petitioner as per instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31st January, 2011 issued ... about Rs. 64,34,663/- and therefore, the jurisdiction will be that of DC/AC and not ITO. Mr. Jain submitted that since notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued by ITO, and not by DC/AC that is by a person who did not have any jurisdiction over

Dcitcc6.2, Mumbai vs. Top Class Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 974/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ld. A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. CIT DR

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

Income- tax Act. 1961(Act) Dear Taxpayer, Thank you for filing your return of income for Assessment Year 2013- 14 in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, vide Ack, no. 333161741150420 on 15/04/2020 2. While acknowledging the care and diligence you have taken in preparing the return ... Assessing Officer disposes of these objections and if satisfied M/s. Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited with the objections, then the impugned reopening notice under section 148 of the Act is dropped/withdrawn otherwise it is proceeded further”. 15.7 From the judgments referred to above, it is clear requirement for recording

Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited, Bombay Mutual Building, Fort vs. ACIT Central Circle 6 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 709/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

Income- tax Act. 1961(Act) Dear Taxpayer, Thank you for filing your return of income for Assessment Year 2013- 14 in response to notice under section 148 of the Act, vide Ack, no. 333161741150420 on 15/04/2020 2. While acknowledging the care and diligence you have taken in preparing the return ... before the reassessment proceedings are commenced. The Assessing Officer disposes of these objections and if satisfied with the objections, then the impugned reopening notice under section 148 of the Act is dropped/withdrawn otherwise it is proceeded further”. 15.7 From the judgments referred to above, it is clear requirement for recording

ITO, Non-Coporate Ward-19(6), Chennai vs. Shri.Gomathinayagam Rathinasabapathy, Ekkaduthangal Chennai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 508/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 47Section 50ESection 54F

Housing and Urban Affairs 15.05.2019 Email sent to the Assessing Officer by the 191 Respondent's Chartered Accountant during re- assessment proceedings 17.03.2016 Notice under section 148 of the Act issued for 194 the Assessment year 2011-12 16.05.2019 Response filed before the Assessing Officer 195 during re-assessment proceedings

DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 4326/MUM/2005[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2024AY 1997-1998

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel and Charu MittalFor Respondent: Shri Sunil A. Umap, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80H

after making certain additions/disallowances. 6. Subsequently, after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 28/01/2003. In response to the aforesaid notice, the assessee filed its return of income on 27/02/2003. The AO vide order ... facts, it is evident that assessment was completed in the case of the assessee under section 143(3) of the Act. Further, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 28/01/2003 i.e. beyond a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year

DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 4325/MUM/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2024AY 1996-1997

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel and Charu MittalFor Respondent: Shri Sunil A. Umap, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80H