← All Phrases

“section 148A”

ReassessmentSection 148ASection 148A2,377 judgments

The decision most relied on for section 148A is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46), cited in 713 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on section 148A

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.

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.
326 ITR 1 · 2010 · Supreme Court
543
citing judgments

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
444 ITR 1 · 2022 · Supreme Court
524
citing judgments

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala
245 ITR 360 · 2000 · Supreme Court
361
citing judgments

An order refusing special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking, does not attract the doctrine of merger, meaning the order under challenge is not substituted.

Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO
156 Taxmann.com 178 · 2023 · High Court
213
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if the Income Tax Department fails to follow the prescribed procedures, including obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 or adhering to the faceless assessment scheme mandates under section 151A.

Varghese v. ITO, Ernakulum
4 SCC 173 · 1981 · Reported
164
citing judgments

Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act are legally binding on the revenue authorities in their administration and implementation. This binding character applies even if the circulars depart from the correct interpretation of the law and cannot be ignored to the prejudice of the assessee.

(P.) Ltd. v. ITO
221 ITR 538 · 1996 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

The sanction of a specified authority under Section 151 is a mandatory procedural check before issuing a notice under Section 148. This procedural safeguard aims to prevent mechanical reopening of assessments and harassment of the assessee.

Shanmugavel Nadar v. State of Tamil Nadu
263 ITR 658 · 2003 · Supreme Court
122
citing judgments

The doctrine of merger applies when appellate jurisdiction is invoked, causing the operative part of a lower court's order or decree to merge into the superior court's order, whether it reverses, modifies, or affirms the original decision. The application of this doctrine depends on the nature of the appellate or revisional order, the scope of statutory provisions, and the subject matter challenged.

Judgments citing section 148A

Sri Lakshmi Multipurpose Cooperative Society Ltd, Udupi vs. ITO Ward - 1 and Tps, Udupi

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

ITA 935/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Years : 2016-17 Sri Lakshmi Multipurpose Co-Operative Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Society Ltd., Ward – 1&Tps, Udupi. Floor-1, Srihari Tower, Kanakadasa Road, Udupi-576 101. Pan – Aakcs 4571 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ravindra Poojary, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel For Department Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24 .06.2024 O R D E R Per Shri Prakash Chand Yadavinstant Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising From The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Dated 22/03/2024 In Din No. Itba/Nfac/S/ 250/2023- 24/1063170077(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Assessee A Cooperative Society, Could Not File Its Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year. Thereafter, On The Basis Of An Information, Revealing That Assessee Has Deposited An Amount Of Rs.4,24,10,051, Ao Issued Notice U/S 148A To The Assessee. The Ao, Page 2 Of 4 While Framing The Assessment, Observed That The Assessee Is Not Qualified For Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Of The Act, Relying Upon The Judgment Of Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Citizen Co-Operative Society Reported In 397 The Ao Framed The Assessment & Made An Addition Of Rs.48,53,282/-.

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra Poojary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 80P(2)(a)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV