← All Phrases

“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
53
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
50
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
32
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
31
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
28
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
26
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
25
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)

Aakruti Ketan Mehta, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3477/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran: A.Y : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 148A

then Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General. 21 Admittedly, in this case, the approval/sanction for order under section 148A(d) of the Act has been granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-8. The entire controversy is, therefore, (a) whether the Principal ... whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the Act and such an order under section 148A(d) of the Act has to be passed with the prior approval of the specified authority. The Explanation to section 148A of the Act also

Rajesh Khanna, Neelkanth Plywood, Yamunanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Yamunanagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 62/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 148Section 69A

order, that the JAO has followed the due process as provided under Section 148A of the Act while completing the order under Section 148A(d) thereof. As to how this is so, once due opportunity was not provided to the assessee, which is the basic tenet

Income Tax Officer, Yamuna Nagar vs. Rajesh Khanna, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 230/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR
Section 148Section 69A

order, that the JAO has followed the due process as provided under Section 148A of the Act while completing the order under Section 148A(d) thereof. As to how this is so, once due opportunity was not provided to the assessee, which is the basic tenet

Nisha Thomas, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-Drp-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2764/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan Kakkad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

issued a notice under section 148A(b) dated 25.05.2022 calling on the assessee to file necessary response. The AO after passing the order under section 148A(d) issued notice under section 148 dated 22.07.2022 re-opening the assessment of the assessee. The assessee did not file any return in response

Sri Shankar Souhardha Pattina Sahakari Niyamit, Gulbarga vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in the above

ITA 877/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 156Section 2(24)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ

Manish Kumar, Kurukshetra vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Kurukshetra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 611/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, C.A and Mr. Shrey Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

under consideration. There was however no response from the assessee and basis the information available on the record, the AO passed the order under section 148A(d) of the Act stating that income of Rs. 20,00,000/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Parinee Housing Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3408/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 185

then Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General. 21. Admittedly, in this case, the approval/sanction for order under section 148A(d) of the Act has been granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8. The entire controversy is, therefore, (a) whether the Principal ... Parinee Housing Pvt. Ltd it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the Act and such an order under section 148A(d) of the Act has to be passed with the prior approval of the specified authority. The Explanation to section 148A

Parinee Housing Private Limited, Vile Parle West vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax - Cental Circle 2(4), Mumbai, New Marine Lines, Churchgate

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2884/MUM/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 185

then Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General. 21. Admittedly, in this case, the approval/sanction for order under section 148A(d) of the Act has been granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8. The entire controversy is, therefore, (a) whether the Principal ... Parinee Housing Pvt. Ltd it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the Act and such an order under section 148A(d) of the Act has to be passed with the prior approval of the specified authority. The Explanation to section 148A

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jaipur vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

ITA 656/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani (FCA)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148A

under section 148 A(d). Notice under section 148 has been issued on 29.03.2022. Copies of notice under section 148A(b), and order under section 148A(d) are available on paper book page No. 14 ITA No. 656/JP/2023 & CO No. 06/JP/2023 ITO vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni ... learned AO completed the assessment not on this ground on the basis of which notice under section 148A(b) was issued and order under section 148A(d) was passed but on the ground that the cash sales were not genuine. The additions of Rs, 65,37,47,750/- was made

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

cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was issued. As there was no response to the show cause notice issued, Order under section 148A(d) of the Act was passed treating it as a fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the Act. Notice under

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

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 on the facts and circumstances ... 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 of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have held that