“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)

Ns Healthcare Services Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 145/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

with the return of income is true and correct. Ld. AO did not accept the reply of the assessee and thereafter an order under section 148A(d) of the Act was issued Page No. 3 I.T.A.Nos.145, 146, 147 & 148/VIZ/2025 I.T.A.Nos.184, 185, 186 & 187/VIZ/2025 M/s. NS Healthcare Services Private

Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Himatnagar, Himatnagar vs. Kalidas Jivabhai Patel, Himatnagar

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 934/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.934/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Kalidas Jivabhai Patel, Ward-1, बनाम/ Asian Parivar, V/S. Himatnagar. Nr. Mahakali Mandir Road, Himatnagar-383001. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Accpp5913D & C.O No.18/Ahd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.934/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kalidas Jivabhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer, Asian Parivar, बनाम/ Ward-1, V/S. Nr. Mahakali Mandir Road, Himatnagar. Himatnagar-383001. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Accpp5913D

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

show cause notice under section 148A(b) dated 26.05.2022 and was ultimately issued notice under section 148 dated 30.07.2022 after passing an order under section 148A(d). In response, the assessee filed his return of income on 19.01.2023 declaring total income of Rs. 3,27,580/-, which was the same

Prabhat Kumar, Delhi vs. ACIT, Int. Tax. 1(1)(1), Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1666/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Prabhat Kumar, Vs Acit, 2-A, Prem Shanti Kunj, Int. Tax 1(1)(1), 2-Club Road, Civil Lines, Delhi. Delhi – 110 054. Pan: Aacpk2240A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ekta Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessees Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 28.03.2024 Passed By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao) U/S 147 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. On Hearing Both The Sides, It Comes Up That Amongst Other Grounds On Merits & Also Legal Grounds, The Assessee Has Raised Grounds No.2 & 3 As Follows:- “2. That Proceedings Initiated U/S 147 Read With Section 148 Of The Act For The Instant Assessment Year Are Barred By Limitation & Both The Initiation Of Proceedings & Assumption Of Jurisdiction To Frame Order Of Assessment & Deserves To Be Quashed As Such. 3. That Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act & Assumption Of Jurisdiction To Frame Assessment U/S 147/144C(13) Of The Act Are Without Satisfying The Statutory Preconditions Provided In The Act & Therefore Without Jurisdiction & Deserve To Be Quashed As Such.”

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Ekta Jain, CIT-DR

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

issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The said notice was required to be accompanied by an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. Thus, the AO was required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act within the said twenty-nine days notwithstanding ... period of limitation. 3 71. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that the AO is required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the end of the month following the month on which the reply to the notice under Section 148A

Sridhar Kumari, Kanchipuram vs. ACIT, Ncc-22(1), Chennai

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

ITA 398/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.398/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sridhar Kumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 12-B, First Street, Ellappa Nagar, Income Tax, Kanchipuram 631 502. Non Corporate Circle 22(1), (Tbm), Chennai. [Pan:Anppk2206G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Deeptha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Deeptha, Addl. CIT

Section 148Section 148ASection 151

PCCIT, but, not PCIT. Since the Assessing Officer has taken prior approval from PCIT-1, Chennai for issuance of notice vide order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated 21.07.2022, the reassessment made thereon, is invalid and quashed. Thus, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowed

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle (Exemptions), Nagpur vs. Vasantrao Naik State Agriculture Extention Management Institute, Nagpur

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 208/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Anand Nagrale

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148A

Deposit in the bank account and the contention made by the assessee AOP regarding the variation in quantum as mentioned in the order under section 148A(d) has been verified with the bank account statements and the assessee AOP's submission is accepted In the above circumstances, the assessment

Ajay Multi Projects Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 4(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2675/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 68

Ajay Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner of Income Tax was the Specified Authority for seeking approval for passing order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act (new regime) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 6 In this regard we deem ... 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

Anisha Raoof Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 744/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149

revenue with a direction to respond within 14 days, in terms of provision of Section 148A(b) of the Act. Thereafter, an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act was passed by the AO on 29.07.2022, after taking into account the reply of the assessee, informing that

Shivani Tayal, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 49(1), New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5833/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Shivani Tayal Vs. Income Tax Officer, C-27, Shop No.9-10, Ward 49(1), Mansarovar Garden, New New Delhi Delhi Pan: Andpt8647E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Advocate Ragini Handa Revenue By Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/06/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Dated

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 69C

order under Section Shivani Tayal Vs. ITO 148A(d) of the Act. Thus, the AO was required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act within the said twenty-nine days notwithstanding the time stipulated under Section 148A(d) of the Act. This period expired ... beyond the period of limitation. 71. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that the AO is required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the end of the month following the month on which the reply to the notice under Section 148A

Venkata Lakshmi Padmavathi Uppalapu, Vijayawada vs. ITO, Ward - 2(3), Vijayawada

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

ITA 299/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

d) renders the notice invalid. Rajeev Bansal v. UOI (2023) 289 Taxman 389(Cal HC): Reassessment quashed for not issuing as peaking order under Section 148A(d). Touchstone Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2022) 448 ITR 693 (Del HC): Invalidated reassessment due to lack of procedural adherence to Section 148A ... Natural Justice The appellant was not given any opportunity to respond to a show-cause notice, nor was any hearing offered. No order under Section 148A(d) was passed explaining why reassessment was necessary. This omission is a serious breach of natural justice, and reassessment proceedings are liable

Mukesh Kumar Bhawarlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 23(2)6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6695/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jalaj Prakash (Adv), Shri SuchekFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri(SRAR)

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

case of Ashish Agrawal (supra), the said notice was deemed as notice issued under section 148A(b). The AO after passing the order under section 148A(d) issued the notice under section 148 dated 29.07.2022. The contention of the assessee is that the said notice is barred by limitation

Prashant Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(3), Jpr, Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1340/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: MS. Suhani Meharwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 142Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been issued on 31-03- 2022 for the assessment year 2018-19 alongwith order under section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the assessee has been required to file the return of income for the assessment year

Sushil Kumar, Delhi vs. ACIT - Circle -22(2), Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3481/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sushil Kumar Vs. Acit Shreeram Overseas Circle-22(2) 5520, Basti Harpull C. R. Building, Singh, Sadar Bazar, Delhi Delhi Pan: Aalpk5068M Appellant Respondent

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 153ASection 69A

issue a notice under Section 148 of the Act. The said notice was required to be accompanied by an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act. Thus, the AO was required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act within the said twenty-nine days notwithstanding ... beyond the period of limitation. 71. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that the AO is required to pass an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act by the end of the month following the month on which the reply to the notice under Section 148A

Nanneboyina Kalyan Chakravarthy, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, (Ward It), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam02 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.104/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Nanneboyina Kalyan Chakravarthy V. Income Tax Officer C/O. C.R. Hemanthkumar Ward International Taxation Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex. H.No 9-14-4/7, Flat No. 7 M.G. Road, Vijayawada Sowbhagyaapartments Andhra Pradesh – 520002 Cbm Compound, Vip Road Andhra Pradesh - 530003 [Pan: Cuepk3530P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 144C(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

response, assessee submitted his reply. Ld. AO being not satisfied with the reply furnished by the assessee passed an order under section 148A(d) of the Act on 31.03.2023. Ld.AO considered that assessee case as a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, he therefore ... Account with ICICI Bank Account. Assessee also submitted that Ld. AO has considered the cash deposits twice while framing the order under section 148A(d) of the Act. Ld. AO without considering the objections, passed a draft Assessment Order under section 144C(1) of the Act. Assessee raised his objections

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21

Section 148BSection 151

148A(b) but would certainly not vest it with the power to issue a re-assessment notice under Section 148 post an order under Section 148A(d). i) Similarly, in the case of Angelantoni Test Technologies SRL reported in 463 ITR 139 (Refer page no. 166 to 170 of case ... still remains the primary condition to be satisfied before invoking powers under Section 147 of the Act'. 10. Consequently, the impugned orders under Section 148A (d) of the Act and the notices passed under Section 148 of the Act and all consequential action taken thereto are set aside

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2019-20

Section 148BSection 151

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Rosha Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Section 148BSection 151

Rosha Alloys P Limited, Amloh Road, Village Turan, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Ludhiana, Punjab

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Section 148BSection 151

Jyoti Kumari, Purnea vs. Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 39/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time’. The case was selected for scrutiny under section 148. In this regard, order under section 148A(d) of the Act was passed and notice under section 148 by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer was issued on 26.03.2022. The assessee was asked

Mukesh Kumar Yadav, Purnea vs. Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 38/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No. 38/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Mukesh Kumar Yadav,……………..……..………Appellant 133, Kochaili, Dagrua Hat, B.O., Kochaili, Purnea-854326, Bihar [Pan:Aebpy4541D] -Vs.- Income Tax Department,……………………...Respondent Cit(Appeals), Income Tax Office, North Block, Delhi-110001 Appearances By: Shri Rahul Prag, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kumar Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 115BSection 144Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Punjab National Bank. Therefore, after providing opportunity to the assessee under section 148A(b) of the Act, an order under section 148A(d) was passed on 27.03.2022 and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee by the ld. Assessing Officer

Hemant Gordhanbhai Patel, Nadiad vs. The ACIT, Intl. Taxn., Vadodara

In the result, Ground No. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1684/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divyakant Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 69

documents, including NRE Savings Bank statements, Uganda citizenship and passport documents. However, on 29.03.2022, the Income Tax Officer had passed the impugned order under Section 148A(d), holding that income amounting to Rs. 1,92,00,000/- had escaped assessment for the year under consideration. Therefore, it was deemed