“order under section 148A(d)”

ReassessmentSection 148ASection 148A771 judgments

The decision most relied on for order under section 148A(d) is Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (444 ITR 1), cited in 524 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on order under section 148A(d)

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.

Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

466 ITR 474 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Reassessment notices under Section 148A, issued in the context of faceless assessment proceedings, must be issued by the designated Faceless Assessing Officer and not by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

Samp Furniture (P) Ltd. v. ITO

165 Taxmann.com 581 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under section 148A, including the order under section 148A(d), is a mandatory procedural step before reassessment proceedings can be initiated under section 147/148. Failure to comply with this requirement renders the subsequent reassessment proceedings invalid.

Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

463 ITR 702 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

The validity of sanction for issuing orders under section 148A(d) and notices under section 148 must be tested with reference to the amended section 151. If sanction is not granted by an authority specified under section 151(ii), such orders and notices are invalid and liable to be quashed.

Sundaram Multi Pap Ltd. v. ACIT

164 Taxmann.com 414 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

An order passed under Section 148A(d) and subsequent proceedings are void if the Assessing Officer provides insufficient opportunity for the assessee to file a reply before issuing the notice under Section 148A(b).

Holiday Developers (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

159 Taxmann.com 178 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Where more than three years have expired from the end of a relevant assessment year, the sanctioning authority under section 151(ii) for reassessment proceedings must be the Principal Chief Commissioner, not the Principal Commissioner. An order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 based on the latter's approval are liable to be quashed.

Core Logistic Company v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

175 Taxmann.com 453 · 2025 · High Court

citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is the specified authority for issuing a notice under Section 148 within three years when the amount involved exceeds fifty lakhs, as per Section 151(i) and Section 149(1). An order under Section 148A(d) requires approval from such a specified authority.

Royal Bitumen (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

164 Taxmann.com 606 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Orders passed under section 148A(d) and subsequent reassessment proceedings are vitiated if the Assessing Officer fails to provide a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee before issuing the notice.

Judgments citing order under section 148A(d)

Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant CIT, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 368/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan Sshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.368/Viz/2025 (Assessment Year 2016-17) (Assessment Year 2016-17) Sivadurgavara Prasad Chennupati, H. No. 27-32-27, Raghu Paints, Mudda Subbaiah Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada ............... Appellant Pan: Aeepc5404L V/S Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 2(1), ……………… Respondent C R Building, 1St Floor Annex, M.G. Road, Vijayawada Assessee By : Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 28

provisions of section 148A(b) of the Act. 9. After rejecting the objections filed by the assessee on 13/06/2022, an order under section 148A(d) of the Act was passed on 26/07/2022 declaring that it is a fit case for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Thereafter

Siva Durga Vara Prasad Chennupati, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 367/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.R. Hemanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250Section 28

Anupama Vintrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1313/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2015-16 Anupama Vintrade Pvt. Ltd..….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 77, 4Th Floor, Room 422, Elliot Road, Kol-700016.. [Pan: Aahca5675R] Vs. Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata….……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.03.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 14 Days. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250

officer was required to obtain prior approval of the specified authority according to Section 151 of the new regime before passing an order under section 148A(d) or issuing a notice under section 148. These notices ought to have been issued following the time limits specified under section

Kamlawati Chowhan, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 46(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1247/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the CIT(A). However, due to non-compliance on consecutive dates, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte. The assessee has now preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal, contending that the authorities below passed the orders without affording a reasonable opportunity to substantiate its claim with supporting evidence. The assessee, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to substantiate its case before the Assessing Officer.

Section 131Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

there was no compliance by the assessee to the show cause notice issued under Section 148A(b), an order under Section 148A(d) was passed and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued thereafter. In response, the assessee filed its return of income declaring the same total

Pichaimani Gunasundari, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Nc-22(1), Tambaram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms above

ITA 2333/CHNY/2025[2019-20 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2333/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Pichaimani Gunasundari, The Ito, No.65, Saratha Flats, Non-Corporate Ward-22(1), Ganapathi Nagar, Tambaram. 4Th Street, Urapakkam, Kancheepuram-603 210. [Pan: Cqgpg 6518 M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

reckoned as nullity in law for want of jurisdiction. 8. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the passing of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the JAO as against the passing of the such order by the FAO would completely defy the prescription

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Office vs. Ritu Bala, Faridabda

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3621/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Income Tax Officer, Ritu Bala, Vs. Faridabad 4237 Indra Prashtha Colony, Haryana Faridabad – 121 001 Haryana Pan :Bdhpb1495B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 69C

read with section 144B of the Act for assessment year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that as per order under Section 148A(d) of the Act dated 31.03.2022 was passed with approval of specified authority along with notice under Section 148 of the Act. In case

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Taradevi Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

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

ITA 499/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and Tushar NagoriFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 69C

under section 148A(d) of the Act. The AO issued notice under section 148 dated 04.04.2022. On perusal of the order under section 148A(d) of the Act and 148 (page 42 to 46 and 47 of PB) we notice that the impugned notices are issued after obtaining the prior ... April 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act. One of the grounds raised is that the sanction to pass the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act is invalid inasmuch as the sanction has been admittedly issued

Asmath Basha Akthar Basha, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1, Krishnagiri

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

ITA 2314/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2314/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Asmath Basha Akthar Basha, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, D. No. 51-9, Bharathi Nagar, Iind Ward 1, Cross, Newpet, Krishnagiri 635 001, Krishnagiri. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Afgpa0229L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. When The Appeal Was Taken Up For Hearing, The Ld. Ar Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate Drew Our Attention To The Application Seeking Permission To File Additional Grounds Of Appeal Dated 10.10.2025 Placed

For Appellant: Shri S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

additional ground raised by the assessee is reproduced herein below: 1. The Reassessment Proceeding is null and void, as the order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 dated 11.04.2022 were issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Krishnagiri, being the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) violating section ... 151A and Faceless Reassessment Scheme, 2022. 6. The ld. AR submits that the order under section 148A(d) of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act dated 11.04.2022 were issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward I, Krishnagiri. The ld. AR vehemently argued that the assessment order

Subramaniam Avinashilingam, Tirupur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Tirupur

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

ITA 2297/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2297/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Subramaniam Avinashilingam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 17, Valipalayam Lane, Valipalayam, Ward 1(2), Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aexpa2463E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri S. Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 54Section 54F

confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. The ld. AR Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate drew our attention to the order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated 29.03.2023 passed by the jurisdiction Assessing Officer placed page 23 of the paper book. He also drew our attention to para ... note that the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2025 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer in pursuance of order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated 29.03.2023. On perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Mark

Pavan Balan, Nilgiris vs. ITO, Ward 1, Ooty

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

ITA 2116/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2116/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pavan Balan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 63A Maruti, Mount Pleasant, Coonoor, Ward 1, Ooty. Nilgiris 643 102. [Pan: Aihpp9673P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Vijayakumar, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri N. Vijayakumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. The ld. AR Shri N. Vijayakumar, CA drew our attention to the order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated 15.04.2022 passed by the jurisdiction Assessing Officer placed on record. He also drew our attention to para 1.1 at page ... Further, we note that the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer in pursuance of order under section 148A(d) of the Act. On perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Mark Studio India

Travelport Global Distribution System Bv, Netherland vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1628/DEL/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Travelport Global Distribution Vs Assistant Commissioner Of System Bv, Taurusavenue Income Tax, Circle 33A-2132 Ls, Po Box 3064- International Taxation 1(3)(1) 2130Kb, Hoofddrop, The Civic Centre, Minto Road, Netherlands, Netherland New Delhi Pan: Aaccg2258D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. K. Agarwal, Adv, Sh. Vibha Bansal, Ca & Sh. Arihant Jain, Ca Revenue By Sh. Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final

Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 4Section 44C

said notice. The Assessee responded to the notice dated 25.05.2022 by a letter dated 09.06.2022. 5. The AO passed an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act on 19.07.2022. According to the Assessee, the same was beyond the period as stipulated for issuance of notice under Section ... notice under Section 148 of the Act so as to provide the AO a minimum of seven days to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. If the time available to the AO to decide whether it is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Adajan vs. Shivlal Shamjibhai Ponkia, City Light Road, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 817/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl. आयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Appeal(S) By : No(S)

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 &2 - Shri Aashish Pophare, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

issued on 26/04/2021 which was subsequently treated as show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act. And after passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act on 28/07/2022, another notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued by the AO on 28/07/2022. According

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(1), Surat vs. Bhanubhai Ranchhodbhai Asodaria, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1003/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl. आयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Appeal(S) By : No(S)

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 &2 - Shri Aashish Pophare, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Anavil Business Centre, Hazira Raod vs. Sharmishthaben Shivlal Ponkia, Umra, Bharthana B.O, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1002/SRT/2024[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl. आयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Appeal(S) By : No(S)

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 &2 - Shri Aashish Pophare, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Income Tax Officer, Tenali vs. Suryaprakasarao Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations, while for the appeal filed by the revenue having been rendered as academic in nature, is ...

ITA 239/VIZ/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.239/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Suryaprakasarao Tenali. Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle, Bapatla. Pan: Dmqpk7509P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 69A

account with Axis Bank, but had not filed his return of income, initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. Thereafter, an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was passed, followed by a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, dated 07/04/2022 to the assessee. 7. During ... fifth provisos or extended by the sixth proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 149. 49. In the present case, the order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148 have been issued on 07.04.2022 relatable to the relevant Assessment Year 2018- 19 i.e., after more than three years

M.A. Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1272/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2015-16 M. A Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.……………………….……….……….……Appellant 2, Lal Bazaar Street, 1St Floor, Kol-700001.. [Pan: Aaccm0481E] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(1), Kolkata…….…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Praveen Kishore, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 09, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 17, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.05.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2015–16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Of The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The A.Y 2015-16 U/S 139 Of The Act On 20.07.2015 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,647/-. The Said Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Later On, Based On Information Received Through Itba Software Under The Head High Risk Transaction Case Notice U/S 148A(B) Of The Act Was Issued & Finally Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued On 13.07.2022. In Response, The Assessee Filed Return On 02.11.2021 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.9,647. Assessment Was Made Under Sec. 147 M. A Financial Services Pvt. Ltd Read With Section 144B Of The Act On 24.05.2023 Determining Total Income Of Rs.6,55,31,471/- Inter-Alia Making Following Addition:

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 69A

Income Tax Officer-2(1), Indore, Aayakar Bhawan Indore vs. Gurdeep Singh Chhabra, Indore

ITA 726/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 147Section 148Section 148A

No.726/Ind/2024 & CO No.14/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2014-15 You are hereby show caused and been given one more chance to explain as to why an order under section 148A(d) of Income Tax Axt, 1961 should not be passed holding that it is a fit case for issue of notice under section ... proceedings facility though your account in e-filling portal of Income Tax Department. Your reply, if any, will be considered before passing order under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, and before issuance of notice under section 148 of Income Tax Act. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT PRADUMAN KUMAR MISHRA

Anguri Devi Khandelwal (Radha Mohan Khandelwal (Legal Heir), Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 389/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, Ld. C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurva Awasthi, Ld. JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148A

Khandelwal, Jaipur. Hence, this appeal wherein validity of the very notice under section 148A(b) issued to Smt. Anguri Devi and the order under section 148A(d) passed against her legal heir, and the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A), NFAC, have been challenged. 2. Arguments heard. File perused ... appellant that the assessment order was invalid because of issuance of notice u/s 148A(b) against Smt. Anguri Devi and passing of order under section 148A(d) of the Act against legal heir of Smt. Anguri Devi Khandelwal. 4 Anguri Devi Khandelwal L/h Radha Mohan Khandelwal, Jaipur. Department is apprised

Ramesh Sistla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 45/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Y. V. Bhanu Narayan RaoFor Respondent: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 68Section 69A

issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) to the assessee on 07.04.2022, after passing an order under section 148A(d) of the Act on the same date. In response to the said notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed ... which is contrary to the scheme of faceless reassessment introduced by the CBDT. 7. The Ld. AR invited our attention to the order under section 148A(d) dated 07.04.2022 and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act on the same date. He demonstrated that both documents clearly bear

Abhishek Reddy Boyapally, Hyderabad vs. ITO (Int Taxn) - 2, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 352/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.352/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Abhishek Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer Boyapally, Hyderabad International Taxation-2, Pan: Bodpb0397F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ca Y. V. Bhanu Narayan Rao रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit(Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 17/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Abhishek Reddy Boyapally (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Passed By The Ito, International Taxation-2, Hyderabad (“Ld. Ao”), Dated 25.12.2024 For The A.Y 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: CA Y. V. Bhanu Narayan RaoFor Respondent: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 144BSection 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148A

information available with him, issued a notice under section 148 of the Act to the assessee on 12.04.2022, after passing an order under section 148A(d) of the Act on the same date. After considering the submission of the assessee the Ld. AO passed draft order under section 144C ... scheme of faceless reassessment introduced by the CBDT. Page 4 of 27 6. The Ld. AR invited our attention to the order under section 148A(d) dated 12.04.2022 and the notice issued under section 148 of the Act on the same date. He demonstrated that both documents clearly bear