← 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

Jeyaraman Johnson Kumar, Trichy vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Trichy

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

ITA 3127/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3127/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Jeyaraman Johnson The Income Tax Officer, Kumar, Vs. Ward 1(1), Plot No.3 & 4, Bharathi Nagar, Trichy 11Th Cross, Puthur, Trichy – 620 017. Pan: Ahipj 7887P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20..01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

NFAC which is not in accordance with the aforesaid Scheme. We also find that the impugned order under Clause (d) to Section 148A of the Act dated 21.02.2024 has been passed after CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. Hence, the aforesaid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case ... NFAC which is not in accordance with the aforesaid Scheme. We also find that the impugned order under Clause (d) to Section 148A of the Act dated 27.03.2023 has been passed after CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. Hence, the aforesaid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case

Manackchand Aarthi, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kancheepuram

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

ITA 3112/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3112/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Smt. Manackchand Aarthi, The Income Tax Officer, No.17/2A, Gandhi Road, Vs. Ward 1, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram Kancheepuram – 602 105. Pan: Caxpa 6225Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

NFAC which is not in accordance with the aforesaid Scheme. We also find that the impugned order under Clause (d) to Section 148A of the Act has been passed after CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. Hence, the aforesaid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case ... NFAC which is not in accordance with the aforesaid Scheme. We also find that the impugned order under Clause (d) to Section 148A of the Act dated 27.03.2023 has been passed after CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022. Hence, the aforesaid CBDT Notification dated 29.03.2022 is directly applicable in this case

Rohit Goel, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-20, Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 8320/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8320/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Rohit Goel, Vs Dcit, The Tax Chambers, Central Circle-20, Advocates & Legal Advisors, New Delhi-110055 C-177, Defence Colony, Lgf, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amvpg5611Q Assessee By: Ms. Swati Talwar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Cit(A)-27, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024-25/1073465261(1) Dated 19.02.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Ms. Swati Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

department as follows: “7. The learned AO was not persuaded with the explanation provided by the petitioner and passed an order dated 29.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Act, holding that it was a fit case for reopening the assessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act. The said ... issued a notice dated 29.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Act accompanied with the order dated 29.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. It is the petitioner’s case that the said notice is barred by limitation. 9. It is material to note that the original notice under

Anand Bhausaheb Bhalekar, Aurangabad vs. ITO, Ward -1(5), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1207/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1207/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Anand Bhausaheb Bhalekar, V The Income Tax Plot No.259/C, Gut No.126/2, S Officer, Shantiban Hariram Nagar, Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. Behind Nandini Hotel, Aurangabad – 431001. Pan: Aompb6314E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Shubham Rathi – Virtual Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – Virtual Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac],Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16Dated 12.03.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 151ASection 250

under : Quote, “15. Considering the facts of the case, it is not in dispute that the respondent Assessing Officer has issued the notice under section 148A(b) of the Act after the period of six years were over on 31.03.2022. As observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case ... present petitions are concerned, though dated 31.03.2021, admittedly have been issued after 01.04.2021. 16. It is also not in dispute that the notices under section 148A(b) have been issued pursuant to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in 5 ITA No.1207/PUN/2025 [A] Ashish Agarwal (supra) dated

Lalitha Kuchibhatla, Chittoor vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Tirupati

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above observation

ITA 1543/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1543/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Lalitha Kuchibhatla Vs. Income Tax Officer Chittoor Ward 1(1) Pan:Axdpk2304D Tirupati (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S. Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Smt. Lalitha Kuchibhatla (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 26.08.2025 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Advocate S. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Madhukar AVES, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 145Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A(1)

also raised the following additional ground of appeal: “a. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Tirupati has no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148A(b); pass an order under section 148A(d) and issued notice under section 1458 of the I.T. Act and, therefore, the consequent proceedings including ... from the end of the assessment year. c. The A.O and the CIT (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the notice under section 148A(b) was not served; the said notice was issued after a period of three years and that the income escaping assessment is less than