← All Phrases

“Section 149(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 149Section 149(1)(b)664 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 149(1)(b) is Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (444 ITR 1), cited in 524 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 149(1)(b)

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.

535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI
385 ITR 497 · 2016 · High Court
163
citing judgments

Orders passed under section 201(1) are barred by limitation if the prescribed period of limitation under section 201(3) had expired before the amendment by the Finance Act, 2014 came into force. The amended section 201(3) does not apply retrospectively.

7.14 In CIT v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. Co. Ltd.
196 ITR 149 · 1992 · Supreme Court
120
citing judgments

Incentive provisions in the Income-tax Act, particularly those granting deductions for new industrial undertakings, must be construed liberally to achieve their legislative purpose. This principle guides the interpretation of conditions such as what constitutes a 'new undertaking' versus a 'splitting up or reconstruction' of an existing business for claiming deductions.

Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes
174 Taxmann.com 144 · 2025 · Supreme Court
70
citing judgments

Reassessment notices issued after April 1, 2021, for Assessment Year 2015-16 are time-barred. The relaxation provided by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, does not extend the period of limitation for such notices.

Ravi Badalia v. DCIT
158 Taxmann.com 373 · Reported
42
citing judgments

Additions made in respect of credits reflected in foreign bank accounts for unabated assessment years must be based on incriminating material found during the search.

M B Traders v. ACIT
132 TTJ 490 · 2010 · ITAT
27
citing judgments

Section 148 notices can be issued at any time for assessments or reassessments made in consequence of or to give effect to any final finding, direction, or order of any higher authority.

B.K Gooyee v. CIT
62 ITR 109 · 1966 · High Court
26
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, that is not signed by the Income Tax Officer is invalid and considered no notice at all, as the signature is an essential and integral part of the notice.

P. Satyanarayana Chetty v. Income Tax Officer
101 ITR 385 · 1975 · High Court
25
citing judgments

Sanction for reassessment proceedings under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act must be granted with due application of mind and cannot be a mechanical or routine exercise.

Judgments citing Section 149(1)(b)

Shailesh Kumar, New Delhi vs. Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3641/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Amitabh Shuklashailesh Kumar Vs Acit W-82/1, Eastern Avenue, Sainik Central Circle-27 Farms, New Delhi Jhandewalan, New Delhi Pan: Afppk1645B (Applicant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R. P. Mall, Adv Respondent By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.03.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, (‘Ld. Cit (A)’ For Short), New Delhi Dated 28/03/2025 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Declaring Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. An Assessment Order Came To Be Passed U/S 147 Of The Act On 30/05/2023 By Computing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 72,84,905/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 18,18,380/-. Aggrieved By The Assessment Order Dated 30/05/2023, Assessee Preferred Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A) Vide Order Dated 28/03/2025, Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 3(1)

where the Court held that section 3(1) of TOLA cannot operate to extend the limitation period beyond what is prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the un-amended Act, as it only applies where the original limitation expired between 20.03.2020 and 31.03.2021. For Assessment Year ... TOLA applies to the entire Income Tax Act, including Sections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) is read with TOLA, then all the notices issued between 1 April 2021 and 30 June 2021 pertaining to assessment years

Rupinder Singh Duggal, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1921/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 192Section 54Section 80C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Shri T. R. Senthil

Shiv Extrusion, Jamnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 646/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Shiv Extrusion Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot No.3978 Phase Iiiroad Income Tax Office, Ito Ward No.-R Dared, Jamnagar 2(10), Jamnagar, Income 361004, Gujarat, India, Jamnagar Tax Office, Shiv Smruti, Jamnagar, Jamnagar, Gujarat, 361008, Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkfs7199F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh M. Patel, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151ASection 250

follows: - 1. 1. Jurisdictional Defects (Limitation and Threshold Failure) 1. Invalid Assumption of Jurisdiction due to Retrospective Failure of Monetary Tinreshold (Section 149(1)(b)): The NFAC erred in sustaining the reassessment initiated under the extended period of limitation prescribed by Section 149(1)(b) despite the final assessed income ... threshold of Rupees fifty lakhs or more. -The AD relied on the entire alleged turnover of Rs. 1,17,14,220/- to invoke Section 149(1)(b). The NFAC itself conceded the settled legal position that only the profit embedded in such sales is taxable, not the entire turnover. Since

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1324/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1323/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1322/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue

ITA 1321/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Tarun Chanana, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1320/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1319/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1318/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Malhotra Cables Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1317/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Malhotra Cables Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Centra Circle - 7, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1108/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Malhotra Cables Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle -7, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1107/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Malhotra Cables Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle -7, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1102/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Malhotra Cables Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 7, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1097/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Kranti, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149(1)(b)

fact that there was absolutely no incriminating material found during the course of search for Assessment Year 2016-17. The provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act mandate the existence of incriminating material found during the course of search which constitutes income and which is represented

Shri Gandhi Maulana Azad Shramjivi Ashra, Kutch vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 612/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

provisions of section 282A(1) of the Act. e) The assessment is wrongly re-opened on the basis of time limit mentioned in Section 149(1)(b) of I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That, the Ld. AO has wrongly passed the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s

Shri Gandhi Maulana Azad Shramjivi Ashra, Kutch vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 611/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

provisions of section 282A(1) of the Act. e) The assessment is wrongly re-opened on the basis of time limit mentioned in Section 149(1)(b) of I.T. Act, 1961. 3. That, the Ld. AO has wrongly passed the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B r.w.s

Sunil Suresh Rane, Dombivli vs. ITO Ward 42(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 7729/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarsunil Suresh Rane Vs. Ito Ward 42(3)(4) 301 Amrita, Apts, Rajaji Kautilya Bhawan C41- Path Lane 43, Avenue 3, Near No.4 Dombivli Videsh Bhavan, G Block Mumbai - 421201 Bkc, Gilban Area, Bkc, Bandra East Mumbai - 400051 Pan/Gir No. Abtpr2589P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Aakash Parekh (Virtually Present) Revenue By Shri Brajendra Kumar (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 29.09.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below: “1. Ground No. 1: Gross Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251

income is only Rs 5,36,290, which is admittedly below the monetary threshold of Rs 50,00,000 as prescribed under section 149(1)(b); therefore, the impugned notice is without jurisdiction and bad in law and the consequential reassessment deserves to be quashed. 5.4. On the facts

Mrs. Surekha Legal Representative of Late Shri. Devaraj, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(5), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2419/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Mrs. Surekha (Legal Representative Of Late Shri Devaraj, Since Dead) No.112, 1St Main, Ramarao Layout Vs. Ito Bsk 3Rd Phase, 3Rd Stage Ward 7(2)(5) Bengaluru 560 085 Bengaluru Pan No :Asvps2939R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Balachandran, A.R. Respondent By : Sri N. Balusamy, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.03.2026

For Appellant: Sri Balachandran, A.RFor Respondent: Sri N. Balusamy, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 250

first instance. It ought to be noted that the period allowable for initiating the proceedings under section 148 is the period prescribed under section 149(1)(b) which position is not in dispute and accordingly, proceedings ought to have been initiated as on 31-3-2018. 15. The question ... under section 148 is the issuance of notice, which notice to be valid is required to be initiated within the time prescribed under section 149(1)(b). Notice issued against Kurkal Gopal Shetty on 28-3-2018 being against a dead person, at the very inception would

Shairul Impex, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department (Income Tax Officer Ward 19(3)(1)), Mumbai

ITA 6613/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 147Section 148Section 151A

years and there is no income represented in the form of asset that has escaped assessment in accordance with the applicable provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act as per finance Act, 2021 which was later amended by Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.09.2024. It was the submission ... that earlier the provisions of section 149(1)(b) were applicable only in cases wherein the Id. AO has in his possession books of accounts or other documents or evidence which reveals that the income chargeable to tax represented in the form of ‘asset’, which has escaped assessment or amounts