“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)

Manimozhian Vaideki, Sivagangai vs. ACIT, International Taxation Circle, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2025/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2025/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17 Manimozhian Vaideki, The Assistant Commissioner No.77, Ward-1, Devappattu Vs. Of Income Tax, Kallal, International Taxation Circle, Sivagangai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-630 305. [Pan:Azcpv7593C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(a)

enclosed in pages 6 and 7 of the Paper Book. The Learned AO on due verification of the said reply passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act on 30-3-2023 clearly specifying that income to the extent of Rs 18 lakhs had escaped assessment which warrants

Shabbir Taheri, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward-4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1574/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah & Ms. Tisha Bagh, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151

March 2022 issued under Section 148A(b) 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 I.T.A. No. 1574/Mum/2025 3 invalid inasmuch as the sanction ... April 2022 passed under Section 148Ad) 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

Aptiva Middle East Fze, United Arab Emirates vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), International Taxation, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1221/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Khirendra M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151

March 2022 issued under Section 148A(b) 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 ... April 2022 passed under Section 148Ad) 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

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2309/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

signed either physically or digitally and the same is illegal, invalid and inoperative and further proceedings pursuant thereto including the order under Section 148A(d) of the IT Act, penalty notices, orders, etc., deserve to the quashed.” 11.3 Reliance is then placed on Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High court decision

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 13, Delhi

ITA 2308/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, Delhi

ITA 2306/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2305/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Honeywell Exim Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 6033/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Honeywell Exim Private Vs. Acit, Limited, House No. 121, Circle-10(1), A Pkt., B-04, Keshavpuram. Delhi New Delhi-1100 35 1100 07 Pan: Aadch3719B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv. , Shri Pawan Garg and Ms. Ishika Dua, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

income of Rs.32,87,600 on 09.09.2015. The case was reopened. Notice under Section 148 dated 30.06.2022 was issued on basis of order under Section 148A(d) dated 30.06.2022. The assessee didn’t file ITR and failed to make compliance under Section 148 of the Act. Notice under Section ... order under section 147/144 is illegal and liable to be quashed since show cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, order under Section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 by the AO have been issued and passed without obtaining valid statutory prior approval from the specified authority

Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(3) Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs. Nitinbhai Kanubhai Patel, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 183/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: FixedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-2017 Ito, Ward-4(2)(3) Shri Nitinbhai Kanubhai Patel Ahmedabad. Vs. Room No.303, 3Rd Floor Aaykar Bhavan Vejalpur, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaspp 5802 F (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By : Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.Dr. Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 54BSection 54B(1)(i)

Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2022 SCC Online SC 543). After considering the assessee’s reply, an order under section 148A(d) was passed on 29.07.2022, and thereafter a fresh notice under section 148 was issued after obtaining necessary approval from the competent authority

Jashwantbhai Mahijibhai Baria, Panchmahal vs. ITO, Ward 1, Godhra

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

ITA 1585/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153CSection 270ASection 69

upholding the action of the approving authority who has granted approval for issuance of the impugned notice under section 148 and order under section 148A(d) of the Act in a mechanical manner without verifying any material to check the facts. Without prejudice to the above: Addition

Thanaraj Sumathi, Mayiladuthurai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kumbakonam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2031/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2031/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2019-20 Thanaraj Sumathi, Income Tax Officer, No.3/25, North Street, Vs. Ward-1 Moovalur, Kumbakonam. Mayiladuthurai – 609806. Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Knyps-1061-J] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha, Cit. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, CIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

first. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is not in dispute that the order under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 28.03.2023 was passed by the JAO. It is also not in dispute that ... eyes of law. 3. Ground No.5 is reproduced as under: 5. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the passing of the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the JAO was in complete defiance to theprescription of law/ procedure in relation there toand hence ought to have

Ananda Aqua Exports, Ganapavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavarm

ITA 15/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

considered as show-cause notice under section 148A(b) of the amended Act. Considering the reply of the assessee dated 15.06.2022 order under section 148A(d) was passed on 26.07.2022 and notice under section 148 was issued on 26.07.2022. On a perusal of the submissions made by the assessee during

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata vs. Flex Trade Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1828/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Notice under section 148A(b) of the Act dated 14.03.2022 issued by the Assessing Officer and the resultant order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated 26.03.2022 passed in pursuant thereto, are both illegal, invalid, bad-in-law and without jurisdiction in as much as there were no material

Raghavan, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Ncc-22(1), Tambaram

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

ITA 1776/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1776/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raghavan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3503, Bay View House, Hiraranan, Non Corporate Circle 22(1). 5/63, Omr, Egattur, Thazambur, Tambaram, Chennai. Kanchipuram District, Tamil Nadu. 600 130 [Pan:Ajjpv9178L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.06.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Raised 12 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is 2

For Appellant: Shri Y.Sridhar, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 270ASection 270A(1)Section 270A(2)(b)Section 274

through renewal of another time deposit) to the tune of ₹.25,00,000/- during the period from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018. After passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act, accordingly, the assessee filed the return of income declaring

Motibhai Lallubhai Desai, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 42(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5588/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Mona Solanki, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, (Sr. DR)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(a)Section 151

Act.In this case notice under section 148 was initially issued on 19th May 2021 under the old law.The AO eventually passed an order under section 148A(d) on 13th July 2022 and issued a fresh notice under section 148 on 15th July 2022, after obtaining approval from the Principal Commissioner ... period ended on 31st March 2020. By virtue of TOLA, sanction could be obtained until 30th June 2021 but not thereafter.Since the order under section 148A(d) was passed on 13th July 2022, the AO was required to obtain sanction from the PCCIT as per section 151(ii)). Instead, sanction

Pramila Agarwal, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 531/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 68

proceedings for reassessment could be drawn under section 148A - Assessing Officer did not find merit in reply of assessee and passed an order under section 148A(d) - Whether since entire basis for reopening assessment was nothing but material and information collected during search conducted in year 2016 in premises ... proceedings for reassessment could be drawn under section 148A - Assessing Officer did not find merit in reply of assessee and passed an order under section 148A(d) - Whether since entire basis for reopening assessment was nothing but material and information collected during search conducted in year 2016 in premises

Income Tax Officer-1(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Golden Express Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3039/MUM/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

A.N.Forex Pvt. Ltd. a company implicated in illegal transaction. Based on this information the AO initiated proceeding under section 148A and an order under section 148A(d) was passed on 30.03.2022 followed by a notice under section 148. The AO issued notice under section 142(1) and 143(2) called

Golden Express Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, Mumbai

ITA 1569/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem vs. Govinda Rajulu Srinivasan, Salem

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1250/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1250/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Govinda Rajulu Srinivasan, Tax No.21, Chinna Ezhuthukkara Street, Circle-1, Shevapet, Salem, Salem Tamil Nadu-636 002. [Pan: Avmps5356G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.Bhupendran, Advocate, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.C.Yamuna, Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.C.Yamuna, CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Supreme Court in the case Ashish Agrawal (supra). The AO issued a notice under section 148 dated 30.07.2022 after passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act. In theC.O. of AY 2016-17 one of the legal contentions raised by the assessee is that Page ... 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

Na Roto Machine & Moulds India, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1349/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 133ASection 147Section 148ASection 270A

since the reply of the assessee was received on 30.07.2022, the Assessing Officer had time available till 31.08.2022 to pass the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, along with issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act. Thus, the notice issued in the present case ... under section 148 under TOLA by the Revenue and thereafter date of supplying information to the assessee and date of passing of order under section 148A(d) and date of issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act so as to consider whether issuance of notice under section