← 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

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1988/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Neetu Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1866/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Neetu Nayaar, Delhi vs. ACIT, CC 20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1077/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1290/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1289/DEL/2020[2013-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2013-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1288/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1287/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

section (1) of section151 of the Act provides that after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, notice under section 148 shall not be issued unless the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied, on the reasons recorded

Anil Nachrani, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bhopal

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 47/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 47/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

provisions of Section 147 dealing with re-assessment. The facts were that the assessment was sought to be reopened under Section 147 and notice under section 148 was issued. Validity of reopening was not challenged up to Tribunal and additions were challenged on merits only. The Tribunal Restored the matter

ITO, Jaipur vs. Girraj Khandelwal HUF, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 465/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

For Appellant: Sh. Vishnu Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Giriraj Khandelwal HUF “1. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE Assessee has filed its Original ITR on 30.03.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 530260/- Notice under section 148 on 29/03/2018 with the approval of CIT 2, Jaipur. (PB 1). Assessee has filed ITR in compliance of Section 148, on 04/09/2018 declaring

S. R. Technical Services, Nagpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 42/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.42/Nag/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 S R Technical Services, The Principal C/O. K N D & Associates, Vs Commissioner Of 502-503, Satyam Apartment, Income Tax, Dhantoli, Wardha Road, Nagpur – 2. Nagpur – 440012. Pan: Abmfs6131K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

parties National Trading Company and LENION Trade Link was forwarded by DGIT(Investigation), Pune to the Assessing Officer(AO), Pune. The AO issued notice under section 148 of the Act. The AO passed an order under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, on 18.12.2018 accepting the returned income

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2656/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2655/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2632/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal, Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2630/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal, Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2629/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Ami Deepak Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal, Delhi

In the result, all the six appeals filed by the assessee are allowed as indicated above for statistical purposes

ITA 2627/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

assessee’s sister concern M/s Amardeep Sitting Systems. Thus, the assessee has claimed false deduction under Section 80IC of the Act. 06. Therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 29th March, 2016. On 4th November, 2016, assessee submitted that the return filed on 29th September ... considered as return in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. On 4th November, 2016, assessee was provided with the reasons recorded for reopening. 07. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was also issued on 4th November, 2016. On 4th November

Jammat-E-Islami Hind, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1289/DEL/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: Na Jammat-E-Islami Hind, Vs Cit (Exemptions), D-321, Dawat Nagar, New Delhi. Abul Fazal Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi – 110 025. Pan: Aaatj3324L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 148Section 292B

from this judgement:- “15. …….We need not dilate and expound on the said differentiation in detail in the present case, for service of notice under Section 148 of the Act, it was held in R.K. Upadhyaya (supra) is an aspect relating to procedure and a pre-condition for passing

Inder Chand Bajaj, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2872/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Inder Chand Bajaj (Huf), Vs Dcit, Ae-17, 2Nd Floor, Central Circle-32, Tagore Garden, Delhi. Delhi – 110 027. Pan: Aaahb6564N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms Uma Upadhyay, Ca Revenue By : Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 148Section 153CSection 292B

from this judgement:- “15. …….We need not dilate and expound on the said differentiation in detail in the present case, for service of notice under Section 148 of the Act, it was held in R.K. Upadhyaya (supra) is an aspect relating to procedure and a pre-condition for passing

Pratibha Bisht, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-70(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2318/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Pratibha Bisht, Vs Ito, A-5-4, Plot 5C, Pragatisheel Bairwa, Ward-70(1), Sector-11, Dwarka, Delhi-110075. New Delhi. Pan-Ahspb0980D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Saurav Rohtagi, Ca Respondent By Shri Baldev Singh Negi, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.11.2023 Order

Section 148Section 24Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Companies have deducted required Tax on the Salary Income as well HDFC bank has also deducted the Tax on Interest Income. After receiving notice under Section 148 from Income Tax Department, the Assesse filed the return of income for the relevant assessment year on 28- 04-2019 vide acknowledgement number ... appreciate the contention of the assessee and her adherence to full fill the compliance towards Income Tax department after receiving the Notice under section. 148 and under section 143(2) of the Act and erred by imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.3,50,361/- for the assessment year

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Rajkot vs. Smt. Urmilaben Kishorbhai Viramgama, Rajkot

ITA 66/RJT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 22/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Smt. Bhavnaben बनाम/ Of Income-Tax Bhovanbhai Rangani Vs. Central Circle-1, Rajkot 701, Ratrani Tower, Nr. Bhaktidham Temple, Panchvati Main Road, Rajkot-05 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abupr5242C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 23/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner Shri Bhupendra Trikamji बनाम/ Of Income-Tax Panchani Vs. Central Circle-1, Rajkot 11-A, “Akashdeep”, Sai Nagar Society, B/H. Ramdham Kalawad Road, Rajkot-360007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjpp7612B .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 24/Rjt/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Assistant Commissioner बनाम/ Smt. Dimpleben

Section 147 of the Act and ITA Nos. 22/Rjt/2021 & 12 Ors. (Smt. Bhavnaben B. Rangani & Ors. - 7 - assessment, therefore, was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act in the Month of March, 2019 upon obtaining approval of the competent authority. Different assessees, thereafter, filed their return ... nexus between the names of the person appearing in the Memorandum of Understanding and Sale Deed. 11. The assessment was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019, upon recording of following reasons by the Ld. ITO: ITA Nos. 22/Rjt/2021 & 12 Ors. (Smt. Bhavnaben B. Rangani