“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

Chaman Lal, Mandi vs. Income Tax Officer, Mandi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 489/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: the National Faceless Appeals Centre-Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) and the appeal is dismissed and stated that in the absence of any document/ evidence, no separate reasons needs to be recorded by the appellate authority for affirming the order of A.O. and decided that "It is evident that the appellant during the assessment as well as appellate proceedings failed to furnish documentary evidences/ proper explanation in support of his contention, so in view of aforesaid facts hence the

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kumar, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

assessee failed to file the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. Consequently, proceedings under section 147 were initiated and notice under section 148 dated 28.03.2021 was issued, which remained uncomplied with. Subsequently, several notices under section 142(1) were issued seeking details regarding the source

Income Tax Offier, Ward 6(1), Ludhiana vs. Balpreet Singh, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1022/CHANDI/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Jan 2026

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Balpreet Singh, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 251Section 69A

reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. After obtaining due approval from the Competent Authority under section 151, a notice under section 148 dated 30.03.2021 was issued to the assessee. Despite service of the notice through email, the assessee failed to file the return of income ... under section 144 read with sections 147 and 144B of the Act due to complete non-compliance by the assessee despite issuance of notice under section 148 and several statutory notices under section 142(1) and section 144. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of bank information obtained under section

Income Tax Officer, Dhule vs. Santosh Jaynarayan Sharma, Dhule

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed whereas the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2324/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2324/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay DhivareFor Respondent: Shri Chinmayy Suhas

Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69

passed after taking approval from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Respondent No.2). Since the aforesaid order was passed, as well as the notice under section 148 was issued, after the expiry of three years from the end of A.Y. 2017-18, as per the substituted provisions of re-assessment ... present case A.Y. 2017-18) expired on 30.06.2021, whereas Respondent No.1, despite passing order under section 148A(d) on 18.08.2022, and issuing notice under section 148 on 23.08.2022 [in respect of Assessment Year 2017-18], has obtained approval of Respondent No.2 who is not the authority as prescribed under section

Shri Swami Vivekanand Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Pandharpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2 Pandharpur, Pandharpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1406/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

income was filed after the expiry of the time allowed under section 139(4) and much after thedue date mentioned in the notice under section 148, the Assessing Officer treated the same as invalid andproceeded to complete the assessment in terms of section 144 of the IT Act after hearing

Sunblaze Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1788/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 9(1) Sunblaze Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 164/1, Maniktala Main Road, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Kankurgachi, S.O. Kolkata- Chowringhee Square, Kolkata- Vs. 700054, West Bengal 700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aascs7903D Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Puja Somani, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan &For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

Section 148Section 148A

under:- “That the ld. AO erred in passing an order was u/s 148A(d) of the Act dt.29.7.2022 and issuing the impugned notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act 1961 and 29.07.2012 Assessment Year 2016-17 which is beyond the surviving period of limits of decision

Shah Petroleum Products, Chembur vs. ACIT, Circle 27(3), Mumbai, Vashi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 4905/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2012-13 Shah Petroleum Products, Acit, Circle 27(3), Bpcl Petrol Pump, Opp. Room No. 423, 4Th Floor, Shoppers Stop, Ghatkopar Vs. Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Mahul Road, Chembur, Mumbai, Station Commercial Mumbai – 400089. Complex, Vashi, Pan – Aabfs2738Q Navi Mumbai – 400703. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.06.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In This Case, The Ao Had Received The Information Dated 19.03.2019 From The Ddit (Inv.) Unit – 5(4), Mumbai To The Effect That In A Survey Action Under Section 132 Of The Act Carried Out In The Case Of M/S. Evergreen Enterprise, Statement Of Mr. Nilesh Bharani, Being Partner Of Such Enterprises Recorded Under Section 132 (4) Of The Act, Wherefrom Undisclosed Activity Of Money 2 Shah Petroleum Products

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, SR. D.R

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 250

material facts in the year under consideration by furnishing his return of income for A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessing Officer consequently issued the notice under section 148 of the Act. 4. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessee filed reconciliation of income and TDS statement as on 31/03/2012, audited balance-sheet

Murtuza Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, ground nos. 1 & 2 of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 4080/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Otwani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 48Section 49Section 50CSection 54

been selected for scrutiny under section 147 of the Act. Order under section 148A(d) of the Act was issued on 09.04.2022. Further notice under section 148 was issued and served to assessee on 09.04.2022, in compliance of which the assessee filed ITR under section 148

Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 33(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on merits

ITA 3639/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarito Ward-32(2)(1) Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt Kautilya Bhavan, I-1434, Govardhan Nagar Bandra Kurla Bldg. No. 4, Opp. Poinsur Vs. Complex, Bandra (E), Gymkhana, Kandivali Mumbai-400 051 (West), Mumbai-400 067 Pan/Gir No. Aiypb4411G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ketan L. Vajani, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.01.2026

Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Assessment Year 2011–12 on 27.09.2011, declaring total income of Rs. 55,695/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act on 29.03.2018, after recording reasons and obtaining sanction under the Act. The reopening was based on information received from the DDIT

ITO-26(2)(1), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan Bkc vs. Svadeshi Enterprises (Mumbai), Fort, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5865/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Mr. Akshay & Nishil Jain, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)

objection to reopening on various grounds. 2. The primary ground that has been raised is that the 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. 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 over

Neptune Fincot Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee succeeded ground no

ITA 3946/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69A

assessee submits that Neptune Fincot Pvt. Ltd. (AY 2014-15) case of assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 was reopened under section 147. Notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2021 was issued on 01.04.2021. Copy of notice under section 148 and the e-mail communication through which it was send is also ... also accepted by assessing officer in his comment / report furnished before this bench on 07.10.2025. The ld. AR of assessee submits that notice under section 148 was issued beyond statutory period which cannot be condoned in any circumstances. Therefore, notice itself is invalid and subsequent action initiated on such notice

Naval Seth L/H Late Sh. Ghansham Dass Seth, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-28(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6210/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Mansi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

facts and in law in confirming the order passed by the A.O., despite the same having been passed in pursuance of a notice under section 148 having been issued in the name of a deceased person which is not permissible in law. 2 | P a g e Naval Seth ... 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 4 | P a g e Naval Seth vs ACIT Circle

Chand Jewellers, Nakodar vs. Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar

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

ITA 574/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 574/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chand Jewellers, Bazar Sarafan Vs. Ito-Ward Nakodar, Distt. Jalandhar. Jalandhar. [Pan:-Aahfc5908J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amit Bajaj, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

circumstances of the case and deserves to be quashed. 2. That the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 and the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act are illegal, void ab initio, and unsustainable in law, as the same were based on mere change of opinion and absence ... rate of 60% along with surcharge and cess is appropriate and legally sustainable. The return filed by the assessee in response to notice under Section 148 does not qualify as a voluntary disclosure that would shield the assessee from the consequences of the deeming provisions or the elevated rate

Nayna Mukeshkumar Kotecha, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statical purpose

ITA 187/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Shingala, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Ashok Devichand Jain vs. Union of India [2023] 151 taxmann.com 70 (Bombay)/[2023] 452 ITR 43 (Bombay)[08-03-2022): Held that Where notice under section 148 was issued by an officer who had no jurisdiction over assessee, such notice would have no validity in eyes

Nagarajan Jaya, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kanchipuram

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1815/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. S. P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 264

assessment. Clearly, the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year expired in this case before the issuance of notice under section 148. It is only if the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts is established, then

Santosh Laujari Gupta, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer - 33(3)(3), Kautilya Bhavan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2965/MUM/2025[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2026AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 234ASection 250

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that proceeding initiated under section 147 of the Act and issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act is not in conformity with and is contrary to the provisions of the Act and liable to be cancelled / annulied ... Assessing Officer failed to obtain requisite sanction of prescribed authority as provide in section 151(2) of the Act prior to issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act and therefore order made under section 143(3) rws 147 is liable to be annulled. 5. On the facts

M/S. Shakambhari Ispat & Power Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(3), Kolkata

ITA 931/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2026AY 2019-2020

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148

purchases & sale outside the books of accounts. Therefore, we hold that, despite the deeming fiction applicable to searched persons, the issuance of notice under Section 148 still requires the Assessing Officer to demonstrate that the information unearthed during search leads to escapement of income in the specific assessment year ... deeming fiction set out therein, which stated that the AO shall be deemed to be in possession of information for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act." So, the case pertains to the reopening of an assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, subsequent

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(1), Kolkata vs. Shakambhari Ispat & Power Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1591/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Shakambhari Ispat & Power Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1561/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Shakambhari Ispat & Power Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1560/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1), Kolkata vs. Shakambhari Ispat & Power Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1541/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 147Section 148