← All Phrases

“Section 153(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 153Section 153(2)143 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 153(2) is 153 (Gujarat) 8 Shakti Karnawat v. ITO (296 ITR 90), cited in 171 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 153(2)

153 (Gujarat) 8 Shakti Karnawat v. ITO
296 ITR 90 · 2008 · High Court
171
citing judgments

A live link of third-party information can form the basis for reopening an assessment under Section 148, provided it contains material facts necessary for assessment. The Assessing Officer must demonstrate a "reason to believe" that income has escaped assessment, which can be satisfied by such information even if it pertains to other assessees or relates to accommodation entries.

Sodex SVC India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (TDS) 2(2)
92 Taxmann.com 260 · 2018 · ITAT
86
citing judgments

A statutory provision is not construed to have retrospective operation unless such a construction is explicitly stated in the Act or arises by necessary and distinct implication.

ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd.
20 Taxmann.com 587 · 2012 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Under Section 263, the PCIT/CIT cannot set aside an assessment order for mere 'insufficiency of enquiry' or by remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The PCIT/CIT must conduct necessary inquiries and themselves establish how the order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue before passing a revision order.

Rajinder Nath v. CIT
120 ITR 14 · 1979 · Supreme Court
56
citing judgments

A 'direction' issued by an appellate or revisional authority under Sections 150(1) or 153(3) of the Income-tax Act must be a specific, clear, and mandatory positive command requiring action, and not merely an observation or finding, to be legally effective.

PCIT, Central-3 v. Allied Perfumers (P.) Ltd.
124 Taxmann.com 358 · 2021 · High Court
54
citing judgments

The case is cited for various issues including the definition of capital assets, reassessment procedures under sections 153A and 153C, and the effect of clarificatory amendments.

Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement
155 ITR 166 · 1985 · Supreme Court
52
citing judgments

The phrase "so far as may be" in a statutory provision indicates that the referred procedures, such as those for conducting searches, are to be generally followed to the extent possible, meaning they are not mandatory in every minute detail but applied practically.

CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd.
199 ITR 94 · 1993 · High Court
46
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred by a company for the purpose of its business, including expenses to fulfill statutory legal obligations or those related to an erstwhile business post-transfer, is allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act.

Pr. CIT v. Oberoi Hotels (P.) Ltd.
409 ITR 132 · 2018 · High Court
45
citing judgments

Failure to issue a notice under Section 143(2) within the prescribed time or after the time for completing reassessment under Section 153(2) has expired renders the entire assessment proceedings invalid. Section 292BB does not waive the requirement for such statutorily mandated notices.

Judgments citing Section 153(2)

Ss74 Salem Steel Plant Employee Co-Op Stores Ltd., Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(6), Salem

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1293/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1290/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1291/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1292/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1293/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: S/Shri Senthil Kumar & S.BhupendranFor Respondent: Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 271(1)Section 271BSection 68

case order u/s 144 dated 19.09.2021 was passed in response to notice u/s 148 which was issued on 26.03.2019. Within the meanings of section 153(2) order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) / 144 was to be passed within a period of nine months from the end of the financial year ... which notice u/s 148 was issued. Accordingly, the reassessment order under section 153(2) ought to have been passed on or before 31.12.2019 whereas the same was passed on 19.09.2021. The Ld.AR submitted that through the order u/s. 147 dated 19.09.2021 the Ld.AO has made addition u/s 68 of Rs.29

Ss74 Salem Steel Plant Employee Co-Op Stores Ltd., Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(6), Salem

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1292/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1290/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1291/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1292/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1293/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: S/Shri Senthil Kumar & S.BhupendranFor Respondent: Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 271(1)Section 271BSection 68

case order u/s 144 dated 19.09.2021 was passed in response to notice u/s 148 which was issued on 26.03.2019. Within the meanings of section 153(2) order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) / 144 was to be passed within a period of nine months from the end of the financial year ... which notice u/s 148 was issued. Accordingly, the reassessment order under section 153(2) ought to have been passed on or before 31.12.2019 whereas the same was passed on 19.09.2021. The Ld.AR submitted that through the order u/s. 147 dated 19.09.2021 the Ld.AO has made addition u/s 68 of Rs.29

Ss74 Salem Steel Plant Employee Co-Op Stores Ltd., Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(6), Salem

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1291/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1290/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1291/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1292/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1293/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: S/Shri Senthil Kumar & S.BhupendranFor Respondent: Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 271(1)Section 271BSection 68

case order u/s 144 dated 19.09.2021 was passed in response to notice u/s 148 which was issued on 26.03.2019. Within the meanings of section 153(2) order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) / 144 was to be passed within a period of nine months from the end of the financial year ... which notice u/s 148 was issued. Accordingly, the reassessment order under section 153(2) ought to have been passed on or before 31.12.2019 whereas the same was passed on 19.09.2021. The Ld.AR submitted that through the order u/s. 147 dated 19.09.2021 the Ld.AO has made addition u/s 68 of Rs.29

Ss74 Salem Steel Plant Employee Co-Op Stores Ltd., Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(6), Salem

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 1290/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1290/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1291/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1292/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1293/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2017-18

For Appellant: S/Shri Senthil Kumar & S.BhupendranFor Respondent: Ms.V.Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 271(1)Section 271BSection 68

case order u/s 144 dated 19.09.2021 was passed in response to notice u/s 148 which was issued on 26.03.2019. Within the meanings of section 153(2) order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) / 144 was to be passed within a period of nine months from the end of the financial year ... which notice u/s 148 was issued. Accordingly, the reassessment order under section 153(2) ought to have been passed on or before 31.12.2019 whereas the same was passed on 19.09.2021. The Ld.AR submitted that through the order u/s. 147 dated 19.09.2021 the Ld.AO has made addition u/s 68 of Rs.29

Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit, Mumbai vs. Jt. Commissioner (OSD), Central Circle

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

ITA 941/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit, Jt. Commissioner (Osd), 201/12, Jawahar Nagar, Road No. Office Of Cit(A)-48, Vs. 13 Goregaon (West), Mumbai-400052. Mumbai-400062. Pan No. Aacpd 9215 C Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Sankalp Sharma a/w
Section 143(3)Section 153(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J (SMC)” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI

Late Shreeniwas Joshi, Ranchi vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Ranchi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/RAN/2024[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Jun 2025AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.466/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2001-02 Late Shreeniwas Joshi....................................…...........................……….……Appellant Through L/H Suresh Joshi, Adarsh Market, Upper Bazar, Ranchi-834001. [Pan: Aavpj1437H] Vs. Acit, Circle-3, Ranchi……........…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 24, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 10.10.2024 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’).

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153(2)Section 250

legal heir, the same order is illegal and the assessment order is liable to be set aside. He further stated that as per section 153(2) r.w.r. 4 of the I.T. Rules, the Assessing Officer must issue fresh notice of the assessment to the successor once the original assessee

Mr Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4289/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Mr Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4288/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Mr Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assisatnt Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4286/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4273/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income, Central Circle-1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 4272/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Ismail Muhammad Khan, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the

ITA 4267/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

M/S. Index Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3362/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

M/S. Index Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3361/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

M/S. Index Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3360/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

M/S. Index Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3347/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

M/S. Index Logistics Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 1 (2), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals filed by both the assessees are stands allowed

ITA 3346/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

year in which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A was executed. As per Section 153(2), the authorisation referred to in 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on the conclusion of search as recorded ... year in which last of the authorizations for the search under section 132 or the requisition under section 132A was executed. As per section 153(2) the authorization referred to in section 153(1)(a) shall be deemed to have been executed on conclusion of search as recorded

Kalpana Dilip Mehta As Legal Heir of Dilip D Mehta, Mumbai vs. JCIT 19(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1387/MUM/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ld. C.A. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

under section 147 of the Act. The relevant limitation period for passing order under section 147 of the Act has been provided under section 153(2) of the Act. The relevant provision during relevant period is reproduced as under: "(2) No order of assessment, reassessment or recomputation shall be made

Kuppakounder Thangavelu, Salem vs. ITO, Ward-1(8), Salem

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 349/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)

lower authorities when the legal position is that the order passed by the AO dated 04.12.2019 is barred by limitations in terms of section 153(2) of the Act. For the notice issued u/s.148 dated 24.03.2018, the re- assessment should have been completed on or before 31.12.2018. In as much

ACIT, Circle-7.1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Itc Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 745/KOL/2024[1992-1993]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 1992-1993

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

therewith before the department. The assessee strongly submitted before the AO that the assessment being barred by limitation in terms of Provisions of Section 153(2) of the Act read with proviso. However, the ld. AO rejected the contention of the assessee and held that the assessment was not barred ... which is available at page no. 62 of the Paper Book. The ld. AR further submitted that in terms of provisions of Section 153(2) of the Act as was applicable at the relevant point of time, no assessment shall be framed u/s 147 of the Act after expiry