← 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

Shri Bhavesh Bhuva, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, ground No. 2(i) of the appeal is allowed

ITA 235/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.235/Srt/2022 (Ay 2012-13) (Hearing In Physical Court) Bhavesh Bhuva Income Tax Officer, C-51, Khodiyar Nagar Ward-3(3)(1), Surat, Income Vs Society, Nr. Chikoo Tax Office, Aaykar Bhavan, Wadi, Nana Varachha, Anavil Business Centre, Surat-395006 Hazira Road, Adajan, Pan No: Antpb 8989 P Surat-395007 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 29.05.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 10.06.2022 For Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 26.11.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Bhavesh Bhuva “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Grossly Erred In Passing The Impugned Appellate Order On An Ex-Parte Basis, By Erroneously Holding That The Appellant Is Not Interested In Pursuing The Appeal, When The Fact Is That The Appellant Has Made Detailed Submissions In Form No.35 Itself, Which Ought To Have Been Considered By The Learned Cit(A), Nfac While Passing The Impugned Order. Therefore, The Appellate Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Being Passed On An Ex-Parte Basis, Needs To Be Quashed As Being Erroneous, Illegal & Bad-In-Law.

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

escaped assessment to the extent the said deposit within meaning of section 147 of the Act. The Assessing Officer after recording reasons issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2019. The Assessing Officer further noted that despite servicing notice, the assessee has not responded, nor filed return ... categorically submitted that he had duly return of income for AY 2012-13 on 30.03.2012 with ITO ward 9(1) Surat and that notice under section 148 is based on wrong factual premises that no return of income is filed. The assessee also explained the facts on merits

M/S.U.S.Roofs Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1960/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2023AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

business premises of the assessee and M/s US Realty Private Limited. Consequently, proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 24/11/2010. In response to the aforesaid notice, the assessee filed its return of income ... case, consequent to the survey action under section 133A of the Act, reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 24/11/2010. It is undisputed that during the reassessment proceedings, the AO issued a notice under section

Jt.Commissioner of Income Tax 15(3)2, (OSD), Mumbai vs. M/S.U.S.Roofs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1196/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2023AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/wFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

business premises of the assessee and M/s US Realty Private Limited. Consequently, proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 24/11/2010. In response to the aforesaid notice, the assessee filed its return of income ... case, consequent to the survey action under section 133A of the Act, reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 24/11/2010. It is undisputed that during the reassessment proceedings, the AO issued a notice under section

Jatinder Kumar Ahuja, Kindom of Bahrain vs. DCIT, International Taxation Circle, Gurugram

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2609/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sameer Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

deposited cash of Rs. 12,30,000/- with ICICI Bank Ltd. during the previous year relevant to the AY 2012-13, notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) was issued on ITA No. 2609/ Del/22 30.03.2019 which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee

Shri Praful Khetshibhai Solanki, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 (2) (5), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 356/RJT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot26 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69A

purchased cheque / Demand Drafts of Rs. 1 lakh in lieu of cash from M/s. Shree Panchnath Enterprises. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 148 of the Act initiating re-assessment proceedings. During the re-assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer added the sum of Rs. 1 lakh as unexplained ... issue it would be useful to reproduce the relevant contention of Section 149 for ready reference: “149. Time limit for notice.-(1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,- (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless

Vijay Hiralal Rajput, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(9) Old/ 3(2)(6) New, Surat

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

ITA 96/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)

reasons that income of assessee as escaped assessment with regard to various credits in his several bank accounts, the Assessing Officer after serving notice under section 148 dated 30.03.2019. In response to 2 Vijay H Rajput notice under section 148, the assessee filed his return of income on 23.12.2019 declaring

M/S. Patel Ambalal Hargovandas & Co., Surat vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the results, appeal filed by Revenue (in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 185/SRT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.49/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Rasikbhai Narottamdas Patel, Surat. Flat No.9-10, Mahavir Nagar Co.Op H.S. Ltd., Bldg-12, Nr. Gayatri Mandir, Udhna Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Adgpp4550M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.86/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Ashish Karamshibhai Koshiya, Surat. 40, Jivandeep Soceity, Singanpor Road, Katargam, Surat, Gujarat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aojpk1118G (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.185/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2020-21) M/S. Patel Ambalal Hargovandas Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-2 & Co., Surat. 5/725, Haripura, Bhavaniwad, Opp. Dhobi Sheri, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aadfp2517N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Shri Vartik Choksi, Shri Biren Shah & Shri Respondent By Nitin Gheewala, Ar Date Of Hearing 26/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 292CSection 69C

assessment year 1997-98 was completed on 25-2- 2000. On 3-22-2000, there was a search and consequent there to, notice under section 148 dated 26-3-2003 was issued to the assessee. Consequent to the search, block assessment order was framed on 30-11-2008 in which

Sh. Arashpreet Singh. S/O.Late.Sh. Gurmail Singh, Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax .Circle-II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 64/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Sh. Arashpreet Singh S/O. Late Sh. Gurmail Singh, Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 63/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Sh. Arashpreet Singh S/O. Late Sh. Gurmail Singh, Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Cercle- II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 62/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Sh. Arspreet Singh . S/O. Late. Sh. Gurmail Singh, Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle .II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 61/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Sh. Arashpreet Singh S/O Late Sh. Gurmail Singh, Shri Mukatsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 60/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Late. Sh. Gurmail Singh S/O. Sh. Lal Singh, Sri Mukatsar vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 59/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Late. Sh. Gurmail. Singh. S/O. Sh. Lal Singh, Sri Mukatsar vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 58/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Late. Sh. Gurmail Singh.S/O. Late Sh. Lal Singh, Sri Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 57/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Late. Sh. Gurmail. Singh S/O. Sh. Lal Singh, Shri Mukat Sar vs. Dy. Commissioner of 9Income Tax. Circle -II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 56/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Late. Sh. Gumail Singh . S/O. Sh. Lal Singh, Muktsar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -II, Bathinda

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 55/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as valid, though proceedings under section 147 are void ab-initio as notice under section 148 was never served in accordance with the provisions of section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. That in the facts and circumstances ... which provides Late Sh. Gurmail Singh v. Dy. CIT & Ors for recording of satisfaction that it was a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 on the reasons recorded by the ld. Assessing Officer. 10. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner

Mohit Maheshwari, Mumbai vs. Int. Tax Ward- ITO 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 602/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 148Section 69

resident”. He submitted that the assessment of the year under consideration was reopened by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on the reasoning that the assessee has purchased an immovable property for a sum of Rs. 14,06,05,536/-. During the course

DCIT Central Circle-2(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Asian Star Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2778/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S Asian Star Company Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No.803, 8Th Floor, 114-C, Mitta Court, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, Churchgate, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca4856B Assessee By : Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ms. Vaishali More, Ars Revenue By : Smt. Shailja Rai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: Smt. Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 148

these companies. The total commission expenditure incurred by the assessee company is amounting to ₹ 16,630,422/–. 05. Based on the above information, notice under section 148 of the income tax act was issued on 28/3/2019 after recording the reasons and obtaining approval from The Principal Commissioner of Income ... disclose full and true material facts necessary for assessment of its income for the assessment year under consideration. 06. In response to the notice under section 148, the assessee filed its return of income on 4/4/2019 declaring a total income of ₹ 378,440,970/–. Reasons recorded were communicated

Tadisetti Murali Mohan, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/VIZ/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

sixth assessment year.We find it relevant to extract section 149(1) of the Act herein below: Time limit for notice. 149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,— (a) if four years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless ... issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151. (3) If the person on whom a notice under section 148 is to be served is a person treated as the agent of a non-resident under section 163 and the assessment, reassessment or recomputation to be made