← 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

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1054/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 153C

applicable in the case of the assessee and proviso to section 147 is applicable in the case of the assessee and therefore notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. The therefore notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. The therefore notice under ... company against the notice under objections raised by the assessee company against the notice under objections raised by the assessee company against the notice under section 148 of the Act of the Act were disposed off by the Assessing Officer on by the Assessing Officer on 17/06/2014, wherein he stated

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1053/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 153C

applicable in the case of the assessee and proviso to section 147 is applicable in the case of the assessee and therefore notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. The therefore notice under section 148 of the Act is bad in law. The therefore notice under ... company against the notice under objections raised by the assessee company against the notice under objections raised by the assessee company against the notice under section 148 of the Act of the Act were disposed off by the Assessing Officer on by the Assessing Officer on 17/06/2014, wherein he stated

Kakrla Surya Gangadhar Tilak, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 178/VIZ/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.177/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Smt.Kakarla Guna Vidya Saraswathi Vs. Income Tax Officer C/O Kakrla Surya Gangadhar Tilak Ward-3(3) A-1, Janani Apartments Visakhapatnam Pandurangaswamy Temple Backside Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam [Pan : Apjpk5999N] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sri Kakarla Surya Gangadhar Tilak Vs. Income Tax Officer A-1, Janani Apartments Ward-1(2) Pandurangaswamy Temple Backside Visakhapatnam Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam [Pan : Ahbpk5319G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri I.Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)]-1 Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 1Section 144Section 148Section 274

null and ab initio void as the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO is not valid for the reason that: (A) The notice under section 148 has not been served on the assessee before passing of the order as mandated by section 148(1) of the Income ... reopening the assessment have been recorded by Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Visakhapatnam and it is the same officer who issued the notice under section 148 dated 19.03.2014 more so in the absence of any order section 127 transferring the case of the assessee from Income-Tax 5 I.T.A

Kakarla Guna Vidya Saraswathi, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 177/VIZ/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.177/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Smt.Kakarla Guna Vidya Saraswathi Vs. Income Tax Officer C/O Kakrla Surya Gangadhar Tilak Ward-3(3) A-1, Janani Apartments Visakhapatnam Pandurangaswamy Temple Backside Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam [Pan : Apjpk5999N] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sri Kakarla Surya Gangadhar Tilak Vs. Income Tax Officer A-1, Janani Apartments Ward-1(2) Pandurangaswamy Temple Backside Visakhapatnam Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam [Pan : Ahbpk5319G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri I.Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)]-1 Visakhapatnam

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 1Section 144Section 148Section 274

null and ab initio void as the assumption of jurisdiction by the AO is not valid for the reason that: (A) The notice under section 148 has not been served on the assessee before passing of the order as mandated by section 148(1) of the Income ... reopening the assessment have been recorded by Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Visakhapatnam and it is the same officer who issued the notice under section 148 dated 19.03.2014 more so in the absence of any order section 127 transferring the case of the assessee from Income-Tax 5 I.T.A

Arun I. Keswani, Mumbai vs. ACIT-21(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 727/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act (the Act) on 165/09/2020. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened under section 147 by issuing of notice under section 148 which was duly served on the assessee. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening is extracted as below:- "A search/survey act/on

Rajesh Somnay, Mumbai vs. ITO, International Taxation, Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

The Appeal is allowed

ITA 533/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash
Section 143(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 54

Assessment Year 2011–12 in the reassessment proceedings initiated after the death of the mother of the Appellant on 17.04.2013 by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 30.03.2015. Thus, despite being aware of the fact that the mother of the Appellant had passed away

Pravina Navin Dedhia, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1701/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Maulik ChoksiFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta
Section 147Section 68Section 69C

stating that the long-term capital gain declared by the assessee was false and the transaction was not genuine. In response to a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee submitted his reply and furnished evidence in support of his claim of long- term capital

ITO 17 (2)(4), Mumbai vs. Neumec Builders & Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6423/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 50C

rights. In view of the above and on being satisfied, assessee’s case for the assessment year 2009-10 was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 31/03/2016, (which was duly served upon the assessee on 30/05/2016), after recording the reasons for reopening the assessment

Emvee Shah Real Estates Private Limited (Formerly Known As Emvee Shah Holdings Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle- 8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

ITA 805/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250

under section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case of the assessee, and Mahendra Corporation and others ITA no.802–805/Mum./2023 notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 30/03/2018. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed its return of income

Pratibha Mahendra Shah, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle- 8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

ITA 804/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250

under section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case of the assessee, and Mahendra Corporation and others ITA no.802–805/Mum./2023 notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 30/03/2018. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed its return of income

Shirin Mahendra Shah, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

ITA 803/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250

under section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case of the assessee, and Mahendra Corporation and others ITA no.802–805/Mum./2023 notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 30/03/2018. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed its return of income

Mahendra Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

ITA 802/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2011-2012

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

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250

under section 147 of the Act were initiated in the case of the assessee, and Mahendra Corporation and others ITA no.802–805/Mum./2023 notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 30/03/2018. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed its return of income

Prashant Chandra Sadh, Mumbai vs. ITO International Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 619/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprashant Chandrasadh, Ito,(Intltax),C4(2)(1), C-1804, Oberoi Woods, Room.No.1708, बनाम/ Off Western Express Air India Building, Vs. Highway,Goregaon East, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400063. Mumba-400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Biips5544N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Soumendu Kumar Dash.DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 68

assessee has sold two residential flats, one at Kandivali and other at Thane. Whereas in the return of income filed in compliance to notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee could not include LTCG arising on the sale of flat at Thane. Therefore, the assessee has claimed exemption

Late Mr. Shankar Mukund Shenai Through His Legal Heir Sangeetha Samir Koppikar, Mum vs. ITO-23(3)(3), Mum

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

ITA 3241/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3241/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिधम Late Shri Shankar Mukund Income Tax Officer, 23 (3) Shenai (3) Vs. (Through His Legal Heir Room No.108, Sangeetha Samir Koppikar) Matrumandirtardeo, Grant Flat No. 1202, Anish Tower Road Senapatibapat Marg, Next To Mumbai-400 007 Ruparel College Matunga (W) Mumbai-400 018 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जी. आइ. आर. सं/.Pan/Gir No.Aahps4468D अपीलार्थी / Appellant .. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Puru Jain & Shri RajendrakumarFor Respondent: Shri Anil K. Das
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

assessee Khimji Karamshi Patel has been communicated to respondent. Notwithstanding the communication of death of Khimji Karamshi Patel, respondent has issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 30° June, 2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 stating that there are reasons to believe that ... issued in the name of the dead person for reopening of assessment is null and void in law. 7. The issue of a notice under Section 148 of the Act is a foundation for reopening of assessment. The sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction to reopen an assessment is that

DCIT-CC 5(2), Mumbai vs. Axiom Cordages Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 2415/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri N.K. Choudhary (Jm)

Section 148Section 40A(3)

requires investigation from the income tax angel. On the basis of the above said information, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 3. In the reopened the assessment, the AO asked the assessee to explain as to why the loading and unloading

Farah Naaz & Others (L/H of Ghulam Nezami), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1889/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Bhatt, CA
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292B

case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts by upholding the issue and service of notice under section 148 dated 28-03-2016 to be valid, even though the same was issued in the name of a deceased person and was returned ... facts by upholding the continuation of proceedings under Section 147 in the name of legal heirs, in absence of a valid service of notice under section 148 within the limitation period. 3. The learned authorized representative of assessee (AR) submitted that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred

ACIT Circle-11(2), New Delhi vs. Humboldt Wedag India Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued after expiry of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year and since appellant has disclosed fully and truly ... material facts necessary for its assessment for subject assessment year, the notice under section 148 of the Act and the reassessment order passed by the Ld. AO is invalid and not sustainable in law. 2.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Humboldt Wedag India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1299/DEL/2020[206-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued after expiry of 4 years from the end of relevant assessment year and since appellant has disclosed fully and truly ... material facts necessary for its assessment for subject assessment year, the notice under section 148 of the Act and the reassessment order passed by the Ld. AO is invalid and not sustainable in law. 2.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

ITA 1952/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

dated 1.12.2011. Consequent to the findings of the CIT(A) in AY 2007-08 (impugned AY) the Assessing Officer seems to have issued notice under section 148 for reopening the assessment for the AY 2006-07 on the reason that the assessee was not eligible for 1952 & 1750/Del/2018 M/s. Oriental

DCIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1750/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1952/Del/2018, A.Y. 2013-14 M/S. The Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-1, Ltu, A-25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi- 110002 Pan :Aaact0627R

Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

dated 1.12.2011. Consequent to the findings of the CIT(A) in AY 2007-08 (impugned AY) the Assessing Officer seems to have issued notice under section 148 for reopening the assessment for the AY 2006-07 on the reason that the assessee was not eligible for 1952 & 1750/Del/2018 M/s. Oriental