“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

Nayan Arvind Lalan, Mumbai vs. ITO, 24(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, all these five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Mrs. Ruchi M Rathod, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

sources. He filed return of income on 31st July, 2009 at ₹1,41,030/-. 04. Case of assessee was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act on 31st March, 2016. Reasons recorded shows that:- i. information is received from Deputy Director of income-tax (Investigation), Unit

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 487/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

through the concerns managed by ‘Shri Praveen Kumar Jain’. The assessing officer after recording reasons to believe that income escaped assessment, issued notice under section 148 of the Act, on 10/03/2015. The assessee filed return of income and assessment under section 147 read with section ... provided to the assessee by the Assessing Officer during the course of the assessment proceeding after filing return of income in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. However, the Ld. counsel has not produced any evidence to support that source of the information was asked from

Areen Consultants P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 10(3), Mumbai

ITA 3544/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satish Mody

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Appellant under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order, dated 30.11.2010, at the total loss of INR 90,69,955/-. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the Assessee and reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were initiated on 28.02.2013. The Appellant requested

Shri. Pradip Chopra, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT (C) 3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 8064/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleshri Pradip Chopra V. Pr. Cit – (C)-3 19Th Floor, Air India Building 23, Maheshwar Niketan Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Peddar Road, Mumbai - 400026 Pan: Aacpc0068J

For Appellant: Shri R.S. KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Kardam

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

paper book). 14. Ld. AR submitted that the assessment for AY 2011-12 (the year under reference) was reopened by notice under section 148 dated 27.03.2018 (reasons recorded @ page nos 58 and 59 of the paper book) 15. Further, he submitted that the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under

M/S. Sree Rajendra Textiles, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore

Accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 697/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Sree Rajendra Textiles, Dcit, Vs. 385, 5Th Floor, Rmv 2Nd Stage, Circle – 5(2)(1), 2Nd Block, 80 Feet Road, Bengaluru. Sanjaynagar, Bengaluru – 560 094. Pan : Aaefs 9813 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the AO initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2017. The AO finally passed an Order of Assessment dated 18.12.2017 under section 143(3) r.w.s

M/S. Ravi Foundation, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-17, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 884/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Arati AggarwalFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar (Sr. AR)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(2)

under section 143(3) of the Act on 06-02-2014. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 26-03-2018. The reason recorded for reopening of assessment under section ... Clause (a) or Clause (b) or both, the proceedings for bringing to tax an 'escaped assessment' can only commence by issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Act within the time prescribed under the Act. Thus, under Section 147, the assessing officer has been vested with the power

Devkinandan Bagadia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Department NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amar Jit Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare, Sr. A.R. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. In pursuance of notice, the assessee filed the return of income which he had filed earlier on 22.07.2010. Necessary notices under section ... these issues the assessee has challenged the reopening in view of the provisions under section 147/148 of the Act. The AO issued the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2017 and in pursuance of the said notice the assessee filed the return of income which he had filed

Monika Anand Gupta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Kalyan

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 5561/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Issuing The Same Were Baseless & As Such, The Reassessment Proceedings In Pursuance Thereof Is Vitiated. 2) The Ld. Cit (A) Also Failed To Consider That The Impugned Order Is Passed Mechanically By The Ld. Assessing Officer Without Affording An Opportunity To The Appellant To Defend Her Case & As Such, The Same Is Liable To Be Annulled On Account Of Non Application Of Mind & Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice. 3) The Ld. Cit (A) Also Failed To Consider That The Appellant Was Never Given Any Opportunity To Cross-Examine The Person Who Made The Statement Against The Appellant, Much Less, The Alleged Material Was Never Provided To Her & As Such, The Same Is Violation Of Principle Of Natural Justice. 4) The Ld. Cit (A) Lost Sight Of The Fact That Any Statement Made By & Person U/S. 132 [4] Cannot Be Used Against Any Third Person & Therefore

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

relevant material for forming a reasonable belief that income has escaped assessment and, therefore, the initiation of reassessment proceedings by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act is in order. 10. In view of the above Rs. 4,00,000/- is added to the total income

M/S. Nitesh Estates Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed on legal issue raised in ground no

ITA 1486/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Nitesh Estates The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of Nitesh Time Square, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, #8, M.G. Road, Circle – 5 [1][2], Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcn9267C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit Revenue By (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 04-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 28/03/2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-5, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Order Of Re-Assessment Is Bad In Law & Void-Ab- Initio For Want Of Requisite Jurisdiction Especially, The Mandatory Requirements To Assume Jurisdiction U/S 148 Of The Act Did Not Exist & Have Not Been Complied With & Consequently, The Re-Assessment Requires To Be Cancelled. 3. The Learned Cit[A] Ought To Have Appreciated That There Was No Fresh Material To Show That Income Had Escaped Assessment Especially When There Was A Scrutiny

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234

selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under section 143 (3) of the Act on 30/12/2011. Page 3 of 17 2.2 Subsequently notice under section 148 was issued to assessee dated 06/03/2014. Assessee vide letter dated 04/04/2014 submitted that the original return filed by assessee on 30/09/2009 may be treated ... return filed in view of the notice under section 148 of the Act. The Ld.AO vide letter dated 04/07/2014 provided reasons recorded which is reproduced as under: “The assessee filed the return of income on 30.09.2009 declaring income of Rs.7,60,68,990/-. The assessment in this case was completed

Shri M. Thimmegowda, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1036/BANG/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 153A

have been removed by the non obstante clause with which such section (1) of Section 153A opens. The time-limit within which the notice under Section 148 can be issued as provided in Section 149 has also been made inapplicable by the non obstante clause. Section 151 which requires sanction ... have been removed by the non obstante clause with which sub-section (1) of section 153A opens. The time-limit within which the notice under section 148 can be issued, as provided in section 149 has also been made inapplicable by the non obstante clause. Section 151 which requires sanction

Shri M. Thimmegowda, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1035/BANG/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 153A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Srinivasa Trust, Bangalore

In the result all the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1475/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Sumer Singh Meena, D.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Chandrashekar, A.R

Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143Section 147Section 148

consequence of the search the case of the assessee Trust was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issue of a notice under section 148 dated 26/03/2013. The assessee in response to and in compliance of the said notice filed a letter dated 29/04/2013 requesting that the return of income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Srinivasa Trust, Bangalore

In the result all the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1473/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Sumer Singh Meena, D.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Chandrashekar, A.R

Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143Section 147Section 148

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Srinivasa Trust, Bangalore

In the result all the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1469/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri Sumer Singh Meena, D.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Chandrashekar, A.R

Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143Section 147Section 148

Shri. Pravin Futarmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with above directions

ITA 4540/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Shri Pravin Futarmal Jain The Income Tax Officer, Office No.6, Jewel Co-Op Society Ward 18(2)(5) Ltd. 3Rd Floor, 44/46, Dhanji Vs. Earnest House Ncpa Marg Street, Mumbai-400 003 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacpj5627L

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in and failed to appreciate that (a) Assessing Officer failed to issue and serve notice under section 148 of the Act before making assessment under section 143(3) row’s 147 of the Act. (b) The learned Assessing Officer failed to provide reason ... justify issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act (e) The initiation of proceeding under section 147 of the Act and issuance of notice under section 148 is without jurisdiction, bad in law and contrary to the provisions of the Act and liable to be cancelled / annulled