“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

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 122/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty

Section 143(3)Section 80C

prior sanction (if applicable), the Assessing Officer would assume jurisdiction to reassess the assessee by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the IT Act. lt is relevant to note that under the erstwhile regime there were no inherent statutory safeguards in form of conducting an inquiry and providing ... opportunity to the assessee before issue of notice under Section 148 of the 1T Act. To address these statutory gaps the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (lndia) Ltd. Vs. lncome Tax Officers & Ors- (2003) SCC 72,held that when a notice under Section 148

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 121/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty

Section 143(3)Section 80C

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 120/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty

Section 143(3)Section 80C

Shri Trilock Chand Bugaliya, Nagaur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Nagaur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 166/JODH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Trilock Chand Bugaliya, Income Tax Officer, C/O Rajendra Jain Advocate, Vs Ward-2, Makrana 106 Akshay Deep Complex, 5Th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur Pan: Acvpb6833F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, C.A. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023 Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jodhpur Dated 14.02.2020 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.03.2013 Passed By Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Makrana. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : Shri Trilock Chand Bugaliya

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50C

that he will not like to press for ground no. 1 which is a legal ground and assessee had challenged the validity of notice under section 148. The ld. AR submitted that in this case assessee had purchased agricultural land on 30.01.2008. Then assessee got the land 2 Shri Trilock ... said activity as adventure in nature of trade and offered the said income in the return of income filed in response to notice under section 148 as business income. However, the Assessing Officer treated the said activity as capital gain and also invoked provision of section

DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi vs. Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 9133/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Subsequently, on the basis of certain information received from investigation wing of the deptt, the re-assessment proceedings were initiated and the notice under Section 148(1) was issued on 31.03.2017 to assume jurisdiction for re-assessment under Section 147 of the Act. The re- assessment proceedings under Section ... transaction giving rise to alleged unaccounted fictitious profits is not made available at any stage of the proceedings beginning with issuance of notice under Section 148 till the matter is traveled to the Tribunal. No instance of unreported profits has been identified even in the assessment as well. The onus

Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 7921/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Ultratech Cement Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- CC -1(4), Mumbai

ITA 221/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. Nitesh Joshi, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri. Alok Kumar, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 35D

Tribunal which was disposed of vide order dated 14/12/2021. 3. However in the meantime the AO by recording reasons for reopening issued notice under section 148 of the Act, copy of which was provided to the assessee. The objections filed by the 4 M/s. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. assessee were

Sh. Farukh Jehan Zeb, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Anant Nag

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 444/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday &For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessment of that year. Both these conditions were conditions precedent to be satisfied before the Assessing Officer 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 if the Assessing

Smt. Pushpa Chhajer, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 136/JODH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

case of ‘CIT Vs Smt Maniben Valji Shah’, 283 ITR 453 the Hon’ble Bombay High Court quashed assessment based on notice under section 148 of the Act where proceedings under section 147 was initiated to verify the source of Investment made in purchase of house. 16 Smt. Pushpa Chhajer ... Courts held that:- “ 14. In view of the above principle of law laid down by the various Courts, it is settled that the notice under Section 148 of the Act is a jurisdictional notice and unless a proper and valid notice is issued and served, jurisdiction to make the assessment

Sampat Lal Lodha, Nathdwara vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2/JODH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

case of ‘CIT Vs Smt Maniben Valji Shah’, 283 ITR 453 the Hon’ble Bombay High Court quashed assessment based on notice under section 148 of the Act where proceedings under section 147 was initiated to verify the source of Investment made in purchase of house. It was held ... income. It may be out of income exempted from tax, past savings, loans, gifts, liquidation of investment or sale of another property etc., notice under section 148 cannot be issued for verification of information, but here the jurisdictional satisfaction is the essential requirement has to be shown that there

Sampat Lal Lodha, Nathdwara vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1/JODH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

case of ‘CIT Vs Smt Maniben Valji Shah’, 283 ITR 453 the Hon’ble Bombay High Court quashed assessment based on notice under section 148 of the Act where proceedings under section 147 was initiated to verify the source of Investment made in purchase of house. It was held ... income. It may be out of income exempted from tax, past savings, loans, gifts, liquidation of investment or sale of another property etc., notice under section 148 cannot be issued for verification of information, but here the jurisdictional satisfaction is the essential requirement has to be shown that there

Bridge India Fund, New Delhi vs. ACIT (Int Tax) Circle-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 458/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Das, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

reply on 27 September 2021 stating that that assessee is making an effort to file the return of income in response to notice under section 148 of the act through e- filing portal but it is unable to file the return of income after the launch of new efiling income ... soon as the e-filing acknowledgement is available. 08. As the assessee did not file any return of income, another notice under section 148 was issued on 30 June 2021. The assessee was also asked to specifically furnish details in respect of the transactions in shares for which the reopening

Bridge India Fund, New Delhi vs. ACIT (Int Tax) Circle-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 457/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Das, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

Amazon Web Services, Inc., Usa vs. ACIT Circle International Tax 1(1)(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 523/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

India-USA DTAA. However, neither TDS has been deducted by the remitter nor the assessee filed ITR for the relevant AYs. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed its return of income for both

Amazon Web Services, Inc., Usa vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, ground No. 3 along with its sub-grounds 3.1 to 3.4, ground No. 4 and ground No. 5 along with its sub-ground 5.1 r.w ground No. 2 are allowed

ITA 522/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 144CSection 147Section 151Section 201Section 9(1)(vi)

Hunt International Investments Llc, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle Int Taxation, 2(1)(1), New Delhi

In the result, impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 916/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy Sआअसं. 916/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2015-16) Hunt International Investments Llc 205-206, Regent Chambers, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Road, 208, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aadch0520J ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit, Circle International Taxation-2(1)(1), Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. A.N. Shah "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Anil Sant, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2023 Passed Under Section 144C(13)/143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Sh. A.N. Shah Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Is A Tax Resident Of Usa. The Assessee Is A Registered Foreign Portfolio Investor [Category-Iii]. The Assessee Primarily Invests In Shares To Earn Long Term

For Appellant: Sh. A.N. ShahFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Sant, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 148

There being no taxable income during the relevant previous year, the assessee did not file any return of income. A notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee on 30.04.2021 for non-filing of return of income. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income

Major Suresh Yadav(Retd.), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-24(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9432/DEL/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2003-04] Major Suresh Yadav (Retd.), Vs Ito, Farm No.36, Dera Mandi Road, Ward-24(3), Mandi Gaon, Near Chattarpur, New Delhi. New Delhi-110030. Pan-Aaupy5153C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Mukesh Kohli, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

assessee appeared before the A.O. and informed him that the return originally filed should be treated as return filed pursuant to the notice under section 148. 2. That merely because assessee participated in proceedings pursuant to notice under section 148, it would not obviate mandatory requirement of Assessing Officer

Jayton Trading Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 65/RPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.65/Rpr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2012-2013) Jayton Trading Private Limited, Vs Dcit (Central)-2, Raipur 15, Crooked Lane, 1St Floor, Hare Street, Kolkata Pan No. :Aaacj 6659 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate, Shri Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31 /07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-3, Bhopal, Dated 06.07.2021 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Dated 06/07/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act & The Assessment Order Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Dated 30/12/2019 Are Illegal & Void Ab Initio. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Confirming That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 28/03/2019 Is Bad In Law. 2.1 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Holding That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 28/03/2019 Is Time Barred By Limitation In View Of First Proviso To Section 147 Of The Act. 2.2 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Confirming The Reason Recorded U/S 148(2) Of The Act Though The Same Is Only A Change Of Opinion On Account Of Borrowed Satisfaction Without Application Of Mind By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

River Valley Meadows and Township (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, reported in [2022] 134 taxmann.com 20 (Bombay), wherein it has been held that, “where notice under section 148 was issued to assessee on 25-6-2019 and prior mandatory approval of Additional CIT which was required under section 151 was dated ... notice shall be issued” reflects the intention of the legislature to indicate that prior approval is the sine qua non before issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. The purpose of insertion of expression ‘No notice shall be issued ' before issuing a notice of re-assessment

Executive Trading Co. Pvt Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Comm of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi

ITA 281/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das

Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69C

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the complaint filed by the Union Bank of India, reassessment proceedings were initiated against the Appellant and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 13/03/2020. In response, the Appellant filed return of income on 16/03/2020 declaring ‘Nil’ income and requested

Rajesh Nobert Colaco, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1567/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

material and the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of the bogus purchase bills, initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. We find that vide order dated 12/01/2016 passed under section 143(3) read with section