← 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

Airoplast Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7409/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 69

Airoplast Private Limited details of the investment pertaining to M s Wavell Industries Pvt Ltd for the year under consideration. On these premises, notice under section 148 was issued on 30 March 2021. 5. In the reassessment order, the Assessing Officer held that the creditworthiness and genuineness of the share

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7396/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

certain borrower or interested groups. Relying upon the said information, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings for all the three years by issuing notices under section 148 of the Act, after following the procedure contemplated under section 148A and obtaining the approval of the specified authority. The reassessments were ultimately ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding validity of issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act 1961 by the Ld AO and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7395/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

certain borrower or interested groups. Relying upon the said information, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings for all the three years by issuing notices under section 148 of the Act, after following the procedure contemplated under section 148A and obtaining the approval of the specified authority. The reassessments were ultimately ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding validity of issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act 1961 by the Ld AO and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7393/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

certain borrower or interested groups. Relying upon the said information, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings for all the three years by issuing notices under section 148 of the Act, after following the procedure contemplated under section 148A and obtaining the approval of the specified authority. The reassessments were ultimately ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in upholding validity of issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act 1961 by the Ld AO and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provision

Amit Narayan Karkera, Usa vs. Income Tax Officer, Kautilya Bhavan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7350/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 69

during the assessment year 2017–18 and had not filed any return of income for the said year. Based on this information, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. It is the consistent and categorical case of the assessee that he was never effectively served with the notice ... electronic mail. Consequently, he could neither respond to the statutory notices nor file a return of income in response to the notice under section 148. In the absence of any compliance from the assessee, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the reassessment ex parte and treated the entire investment

Amish Anantrai Modi, Mumbai vs. Central Circle 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6282/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

quashing of the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section 153C, the case was sought to be reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 dated 04.02.2021. In response thereto, the assessee filed his return of income on 14.02.2021 and simultaneously requested the Assessing Officer to furnish

Mr. Dhiren Pradip Sadiwala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(1)(6), Mumbai

ITA 5551/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

upholding the action of the Income-tax Officer 23(1)(6) Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer) in issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act. The appellant contends that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Addl ... ought not to have upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 2 The Addl CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in making an addition under the head "income from other sources

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5375/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that ... upon the settled legal objections raised by the assessee by relying upon the settled legal position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section 148, position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section 148, position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5374/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

said information, the learned Assessing Officer recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the return filed ... rightly rejected the objections raised by the assessee by relying upon the settled legal position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section 148, the existence of relevant material enabling a reasonable person to form the requisite belief is sufficient, as reiterated by the Hon'ble Delhi High

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5373/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

said information, the learned Assessing Officer recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the return filed

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5372/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

said information, the learned Assessing Officer recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the original return of income filed on 28.09.2009 be treated as the return filed

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5371/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

recorded reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment escaped assessment and accordingly issued notice under section and accordingly issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee requested that ... upon the settled legal objections raised by the assessee by relying upon the settled legal position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section 148, position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section 148, position that at the stage of issuance of notice under section

Charanjit Kaur, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 8558/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2017-18 Mrs. Charanjit Kaur, Vs. Income Tax Officer, F-Ic, Iind Floor, Tilak Nagar Ward-69(1), S.O. (West Delhi), Tilak New Delhi Nagar, West Delhi, New Delhi Pan: Aegpk6308F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148Section 69

believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 was issued on 27.03.2021. During the course of reassessment proceedings, despite issuance of statutory notices and opportunities afforded, the appellant did not furnish ... timely to the notices of the Assessing Officer has been sympathetically considered. However, the record indicates that the Assessing Officer had duly issued notices under sections 148 and 142(1) and provided sufficient opportunities for compliance. The assessment was completed under section 144 only after the appellant's failure

Lalit Kumar, Gurugram vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4) Gurgaon, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6304/DEL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69A

TOLA apply "notwithstanding anything contained in the specified Act." Section 3(1), therefore, overrides the time limits for issuing a notice under Section 148 read with Section 149 of the Income Tax Act; d. TOLA does not extend the life of the old regime. It merely provides a relaxation ... Revenue between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021 as show-cause notices in terms of Section 148A(b). Thereafter, the Revenue issued notices under Section 148 of the new regime between July and August 2022. Invalidation of the Section 148 notices issued under the new regime on the ground

Mr. Abhishek Dixit, Gurugram vs. DDIT/ADIT( in Tax.), Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 148Section 151

case may be reassess the income which he has reason to believe had escaped assessment and which formed the basis of a notice under section 148 then the Assessing Officer could not assess or reassess independently any other income, which does not form the subject-matter of the notice ... submissions have been urged before the Court confined to the following substantial question of law : Where upon the issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with section 147, the Assessing Officer does not assess or, as the case may be reassess the income

Mamraj Aggarwal, Delhi Sadar Bazar, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 47(1), Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3864/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

Section 115BSection 131(1)Section 139Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 69C

Ashok Kumar Gupta and has booked non genuine /bogus sales in his books of accounts to tune of Rs.11,16,49,280/-. Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 13-04-2021 was issued to the assessee. Further in the compliance of the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision, show ... assessments. The provision imposes a responsibility on the Revenue to ensure that it obtains the sanction of the specified authority before issuing a notice under Section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assesses from harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments. 128 A table

New Star System Solution Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-18(2), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 3585/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

objection to reopening on various grounds. The primary ground that has been raised is that the 2. Income Tax Officer who issued the notice under section 148 of the Act, had no jurisdiction to issue such notice. According to Petitioner as per instruction No. 1/2011 dated 31st January, 2011 issued ... about Rs. 3. 64,34,663/- and therefore, the jurisdiction will be that of DC/AC and not ITO. Mr. Jain submitted that since notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued by ITO, and not by DC/AC that is by a person who did not have any jurisdiction

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Noida vs. M/S Rudra Bulldwell Homes Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 1119/DEL/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

have noted that the Cross Objection of the assessee strikes at the very root of the assessment order, i.e. notice under section 148 dated 18.07.2022. The Latin legal maxim Sublato fundamento cadit opus that corresponds to hypothesis that a superstructure does not survive on weak foundation is essential part ... condone the same and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 4. The principal argument taken by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that notice under section 148 dated 18.07.2022 ought to have been issued by the Pr. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax as mandated under section

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. K G Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi

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

ITA 3598/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

suppressed by a sum of Rs.6,25,53,658/-. Proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were initiated on the basis of report. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued. Subsequently, notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. Shri Manoj Pahwa ... basis of report received from DVO vide letters dated 20.01.2017 and 24.01.2017 had initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. Notices under Section 148, 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued regarding suppression of sales by assessee as per valuation report amounting to Rs.6

Misrilall Jain & Sons, Singhbhum West vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 467/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.467/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Misrilall Jain & Sons….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M. D. House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aabfm2851Q] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 20, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 09.10.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

earned interest income of ₹5,32,92,790 from fixed deposits, which was taxable. Accordingly, proceedings under section 147 were initiated and notice under section 148 was issued. It was further noticed that during the relevant previous year, the assessee was also engaged in purchase I.T.A. No.467/Ran/2025 Misrilall Jain & Sons ... filed due to internal managerial disputes arising from the death of a key managerial person, the assessee had responded to the notice under section 148 of the Act by filing draft profit & loss account and computation of income. It was submitted that the interest income