“service of notice”

ReassessmentSection 148Section 1483,297 judgments

The decision most relied on for service of notice is Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai (84 Taxmann.com 51), cited in 263 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on service of notice

Earthmoving Equipment Service Corporation v. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai

84 Taxmann.com 51 · 2017 · ITAT

263

citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be deleted merely due to technical defects in the penalty notice, such as not ticking the specific default, if the assessee understood the charges.

CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

417 ITR 325 · 2019 · Supreme Court

225

citing judgments

Issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is a mandatory requirement for completing an assessment when a return is filed, including reassessment under Section 147/143(3). The complete absence of this notice renders the assessment invalid and is not curable by Section 292BB.

1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.

53 ITR 231 · 1964 · Supreme Court

158

citing judgments

Income-tax assessment proceedings are administrative in nature, not civil disputes or judicial proceedings between contesting parties. Income-tax authorities act as administrative bodies to estimate income and assess tax, and the proper service of notice within the limitation period is foundational for reassessment jurisdiction.

Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship v. CIT (Exemptions)

463 ITR 560 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Service of notice through the ITBA portal is not a valid method of service under section 282(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and Rule 127(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Consequently, matters where notice was deemed invalidly served via ITBA portal are remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de novo disposal to uphold principles of natural justice.

Narayana Chetty v. ITO

35 ITR 388 · 1959 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A valid and properly served notice under section 148 (or old section 34) is a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating reassessment proceedings; its absence or invalidity renders the entire proceedings illegal and void ab initio. The validity of service hinges on adherence to prescribed modes, not merely the recipient's acknowledgment.

Mavis Satcom Ltd. v. Deputy CIT

337 ITR 389 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

The present case is cited as authority for the proposition that notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are valid even if they do not refer to the reasons recorded for initiating reassessment proceedings, provided the reasons are communicated to the assessee. Furthermore, the issue of jurisdiction under Section 124(3) and the validity of notice under Section 143(2) are also key areas addressed.

CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Co.

370 ITR 87 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory, and its non-service or invalidity is not a curable procedural irregularity, rendering subsequent assessment proceedings void. Objections regarding non-service of notice, being a jurisdictional issue, can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal.

Banarsi Debi v. ITO

53 ITR 100 · 1964 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

For income-tax notices, particularly under Section 34(1) of the 1922 Act (corresponding to Sections 147/148 of the 1961 Act), there is no real distinction between the 'issue' and 'service' of a notice. The word 'issued' must be given a wider meaning, effectively encompassing 'served'.

Judgments citing service of notice

Eknath Hiru Patil, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward 2, Panvel

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

ITA 721/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.721/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amil Khairnar

Section 147Section 148

r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Even on the previous dates of hearing, i.e. on 09.07.2025 and 24.09.2025, there was no representation from the side of assessee

Shri Gajanan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Satara vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kolhapur

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

ITA 2077/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2077/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shri Gajanan Nagari Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Sahakari Patsanstha Kolhapur. Maryadit, Malakpur, Tal- Karad, Dist.- Satara, Karad- 415110. Pan : Aabas8429B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Vinod Pawar Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 04.07.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) Ground No. 1- Addition Of Rs. 2,14,62,523/- As Unexplained Cash Credit (U/S 68) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Ao Erred In Making An Addition Of Rs. 2,14,62,523/- On Account Of Unexplained Unsecured Loans Without Considering The Nature Of Deposits.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

When the appeal was called for hearing neither anybody attended nor any application for adjournment was furnished by the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing upon the assessee. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits of the case after hearing Ld. DR and also

Madan Lal Bhaskar, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Faridabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4416/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4416/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Madan Lal Bhaskar, Income Tax Officer, Jeevan Nagar, Sikka Enterprises, Vs. Ward 1(3), Faridabad, Haryana. Faridabad. Pan No.Aejpb6367A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 221Section 250

notes and the conclusion in this case law: “Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for (Service of notice) - Assessment year 2012-13 - An information was received by Assessing Officer that assessee had deposited certain amount in his bank account source of which ... instant petition challenging validity of said notice by contending that it was issued subsequent to death of assessee and, thus, statutory requirement of service of notice had not been fulfilled - Whether in absence of a statutory provision, a duty cannot be cast upon legal representatives to intimate factum of death

Gajanan Ramesh Parab, Kudal Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Kudal, Kudal Sindhudurg

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

ITA 1811/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1811/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale

Section 147Section 148

r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Even on the previous date of hearing, i.e. on 20.11.2025, the matter was adjourned at the request

Vinayak Tradevin Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 898/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmavinayak Tradevin Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolkata 41, B B Ganguly Street, 2Nd Floor, Room No13B, Kol-12. Pan No. : Aaccv8710B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P. K. Himmatsinghka, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Himmatsinghka, ARFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 292B

against the return filed on 27.03.2021 in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The assessment framed under section 147 without service of notice under section 143(2) is invalid in law. In this regard the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High

Lakhabhai Bachubhai Timbadia, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot

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

ITA 685/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 147

Trey ate sftrerur,zrerple ratte ArH le | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN

Madina Rasool Shaik, Guntur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Narasaraopet

ITA 422/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.422/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Madina Rasool Shaik, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Guntur. Ward-1, Pan: Ahfpr3787D Guntur. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 01/12/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 271ASection 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member

Indira Rani Mulpuri, Vijayawada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 134/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal, Which Caused The Delay. She Further Submitted That The Delay Was Neither Intentional Nor Deliberate, Therefore, Pleaded To Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing In The Interest Of Justice.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

attend the proceedings before the Ld.AO. The assessee could not even appear before the Ld.CIT(A) as she was unaware of the service of notices until 5 Indira Rani Mulpuri she received a call from the revenue authorities. He further submitted that the source for the deposits is explained ... before the Ld.AO. The assessee could not even 6 Indira Rani Mulpuri appear before the Ld.CIT(A) as she was unaware of the service of notices. No documentary evidences were produced even before us substantiating the cash receipts from various sources as stated by the assessee

A & B Associates, Thiruvananthapuram vs. The Income Tax Officer, Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 643/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by directing the AO to -

For Appellant: Shri Lokanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Sr. D/R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

partners. As the business was closed down as early as in July, 2018, the appellants had no idea about service of notice through e-mail or even the Faceless Assessment scheme introduced by the department. 8 A&B Associates As the business place was closed and nobody was available ... these were sent to incorrect and non-existent e-mail addresses. Consequently, there was no real or effective service of notice upon the assessee prior to completion of reassessment. The assessment ultimately framed under sections 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act was thus passed without granting the assessee a reasonable

West Coast Foods Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-13(3)(2), Churchgate

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

ITA 6368/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmathy S. ()

Section 250Section 5

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT

Shri Radha Krishan Mandir Trust, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Exemp 2(2), Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1481/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shri Radha Krishan Mandir Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust, Opposite E Block, Greater Ward Exemption 2(2) Kailsah, Part-1, Delhi Civic Centre, Delhi Pan: Aakts7362K Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 292BSection 69A

Reena Mittal vs. DCIT ITA No.2021/Del/2023 dated 04.06.2025 where the order u/s 144 of the Act was quashed in the absence of service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act even in case of a belated return of income. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi

Nisha Fazal, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO-4(3), Kanpur-01

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 226/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

correct and bad in law. 3. Because, the Notice issued u/s 148 dated 31/03/2019 that is last day of six years, but the service of notice is 14/05/2019, that is after expiry of six years and service of notice u/s 148 of IT Act,1961 is beyond the time lime ... annexed herewith as Annexure No.14. 10. That during the assessment proceeding council of the appellant requested in respect of service of notice u/s 148 of the Act, as to how the notice was served to the appellant and through which mode and documentary proof regarding the service of said notice

Savitri Devi, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 6658/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Savitri Devi, H. No.425-A, Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(2), Chirag Delhi, New Delhi-110017 Vs New Delhi-110003 Pan-Agzpd 4853 H Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

assessee was reopened under section 147. Notice under section 148 dated 28.03.2019 was issued to the assessee. The Assessing Officer recorded that despite service of notice under section 148 and the other notice, the assessee has not made any compliance. The Assessing Officer on the basis of information with

Isrinfra Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 478/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 194CSection 40Section 68Section 69C

assessee. 9. Countering the arguments of the Ld. DR, Ld.AR submitted that the Revenue is duty bound to ensure the issuance and service of notice to the assessee before proceeding with the scrutiny assessment proceedings. Ld.AR Page. No 4 LT.A.No.478/VIZ/2024 ISRINFRA PRIVATE LIMITED ** submitted that various judicial precedents have ... held that service of notice to the assessee is mandatory. 10. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the Ld. AO has sent an E-Mail mentioning the body of the E-Mail that notice under section

Menaka Jayasaval, Samastipur vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 169/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 148Section 250Section 69A

notice was served upon the assessee to file her income tax return for the AY 2017-18 within 15 days from the service of notice. The case was reopened after getting necessary approval from the competent authorities on the basis of the information available in AIR with the Department that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirupur vs. Loocust Incorp, Tirupur

In the result, appeal of the assessee vide CO Nos

ITA 1695/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1692, 1693, 1694 & 1695 / Chny/2025 Assessment Years-2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Loocust Incorp, No.28A, Mgr Nagar, 14Th Street, Circle-1(1) Tirupur. Pn Road, Tirupur, Tamil Nadu-641 602. [Pan: Aabfl6721C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Co Nos.-77, 78, 79 & 80 / Chny/2025, Assessment Years-2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Loocust Incorp, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.28A, Mgr Nagar, 14Th Street, Circle-1(1) Pn Road, Tirupur, Tirupur. Tamil Nadu-641 602. [Pan: Aabfl6721C] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.T.Banusekar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)

High Court decision in W.P No.15019 of 2021 dt.04/02/2022. (The appellant prays that a remand report in respect of date and mode of service of notice u/s 148 may be called for deciding the above ground). c) As the assessment completed earlier was u/ s. 143(3), issue of notice

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirupur vs. Loocust Incorp, Tirupur

In the result, appeal of the assessee vide CO Nos

ITA 1694/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)

Deputy Commmissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirupur vs. Loocust Incorp, Tirupur

In the result, appeal of the assessee vide CO Nos

ITA 1693/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tirupur vs. Loocust Incorp, Tirupur

In the result, appeal of the assessee vide CO Nos

ITA 1692/CHNY/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)

Late. Prakash Chandra Virdi, L/R Bharat Bhushan Virdi, Mahasamund vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Mahasamund, Mahasamund

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

ITA 674/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.674/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Late Prakash Chandra Virdi, L/R Bharat Bhushan Virdi, Ward No.3, Near Shiv Mandir, Imli Bhatta, Mahasamund (C.G.)-493 445 Pan: Abjpv6675J

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 282

Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act) were issued to the appellant through ITBA portal, as noted in para 2 above, which amounts to service of notice as provided u/s.282 of the Act. However, there has been no response from the appellant till date. There is no gainsaying that once