← 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

Shamanna Reddy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1120/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Chandra Poojarind Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri. Shamanna Reddy, Vs. Ito, C/O. Chowdeshwari Rice Building, Ward – 4(1)(3), Opp. Hi Look Bakery, Bengaluru. Kasavanahalli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru – 560 035. Pan : Ccwpr 8342 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Nischal, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 250

against the principles of natural justice. 7. The action of learned AO is not justified in serving the notice under sections 148A & 148 for initiating the re-assessment proceeding, as the said notices were not in accordance with section 282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with rule ... income. As per the information received by the Department, assessee had sold an immovable property for Rs.53 lakhs. Based on this information, proceedings under section 148A of the Act was initiated and show cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was issued. As there was no response

Takrar Ranganatha Rao Nagashre, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1122/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19 Takrar Ranganatha Rao Nagashree Ito 20, Singapore Gardens Ward-3(2)(1) Vs. Bangalore 560 062 Bangalore Pan No.Aaipn8579M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sreehari Kutsa, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 14.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Dated 29.12.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Sreehari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

case. 8. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have held that Assessing Officer having failed to issue mandatory notice under section 148A(b) and subsequent order under section 148A(d) of the Act, has rendered the proceedings void ab initio and hence the entire proceedings must fail ... Assessing Officer is bad at law for the reason that the approval has been issued without verifying whether mandatory notice under section 148A(b) and subsequent order under section 148A(d) of the Act have been passed. Takrar Ranganatha Rao, Bangalore Page 3 of 8 11. The learned Commissioner

M/S. Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 320/KOL/2022[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 320/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Unit No. 1501, 15Th Floor Vs Kolkata Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata – 700001 [Pan: Aaaco3479N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/12/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 17/05/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Several Grounds Of Appeal, At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Case Of The Assessee Is Squarely Covered In Favour Of The Assessee By The Decision Of The Co-Ordinate Bench Of The Itat In The Assessee’S Own Case For Assessment Year 2009-10, Wherein The Tribunal While Dealing With The Issue, That Whether The Date On Which The Assessing Officer Has Signed The Notice U/S 143(2) Or The Date On Which The Notice Is Actually Sent To The Assessee Via E-Mail, Has To Be Considered For The Purpose Of Determining

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE