← 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

Sunil Kumar Singh, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 60(5), Delhi, New Delhi

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

ITA 3657/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarsunil Kumar Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, S-172B, Pandav Nagar, Ward 60 (5), Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Bbfps2668B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.01.2025 Date Of Order : 28.01.2026 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 03.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. That The Notice Issued Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) & The Consequential Proceedings Are Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Barred By Time Limitation. 2. That The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Cit(A)’] Has Erred In Not Quashing The Reassessment Proceedings, Which Are Ex Facie Bad In Law & In Violation Of The Settled Judicial

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Lal Chandani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 68

gross violation of principles of natural justice. 5. That the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that the notice under Section 148 of the Act had not been served on the Appellant. Therefore, the subsequent assessment order passed is liable to be quashed. 6. That on the facts ... circumstances of the case, the prior approval taken under Section 151 of the Act for issuing the notice under Section 148 of the Act is mechanical in nature and without any application of mind. Therefore, the subsequent assessment order passed is liable to be quashed. 7. That on the facts

Mr. Harivijay Pralhad Joshi, Pune vs. ITO Ward 3(3), Pune, Swargate

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2297/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2297/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Mr.Harivijay Prahlad Joshi, V The Income Tax 3 & 4, Megh Terrace 55 S Officer, Rambaug, Colony, Behind Ward-3(3), Pune. Chaitanya Health Club, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan: Aappj9257M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – (Virtual) On Rotation Duty Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 14.11.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)

Officer and CIT- Appeal have erred in law and on facts in passing/upholding the assessment under section 147 of the Act and issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, without complying with the various jurisdictional preconditions and statutory safeguards under Income Tax Act, rendering the reassessment proceedings ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice to any other grounds, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act in a standard format without striking off the inapplicable reasons or specifying the exact basis for reopening, thereby

Dgl Dist Govt Teachers Co-Operative Society Limited, Dindigul vs. The Income Tax Officer, Dindigul

ITA 3341/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 3341/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dgl Dist Govt Teachers Co- Operative Society Limited 23D, Krishna Road 2Nd Street, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu 624001 [Pan: Aacad0679F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. Ito Che-W-(501)(91) Chennai (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By : None प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 18.07.2025 For Ay 2019-20.

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami
Section 144BSection 147Section 148

clear that the respondents have erred in not following the mandatory faceless procedure as prescribed in the scheme dated 29.03.2022. Since notices under Section 148 of the Act were not issued in a faceless manner, the entire further proceeding founded upon it and assessment orders stand vitiated. Thus, the impugned

Vasu Saravanan, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 1(6), Chennai

ITA 3331/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 3331/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vasu Saravanan Old No 39, New No. 2, Ramasamy Street, T Nagar, Chennai-600 017 [Pan: Apgps 9284 M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. Ito, Non Corp Ward 1(6) Chennai, Room No. 412, Main Building Ayakar Bhavan, Nungambakka, Chennai, T.N-600034 (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By Mr. Y Sridhar, F.C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 19.09.2025 For Ay 2020-21.

Section 144BSection 147Section 148

clear that the respondents have erred in not following the mandatory faceless procedure as prescribed in the scheme dated 29.03.2022. Since notices under Section 148 of the Act were not issued in a faceless manner, the entire further proceeding founded upon it and assessment orders stand vitiated. Thus, the impugned ... notices under Section 148 of the Act and all consequential assessment orders based thereupon are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. 9. The Hon'ble Telangana High Court in DEEPANJAN ROY Vs ADIT (INT TAXN) 2 HYD & ANR [Writ