← 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)

Rajesh Batra, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Delhi

In the result ITA No.4420/Del/2025 is allowed

ITA 4419/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4419, 4420 & 4421/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम Shri Rajesh Batra, Income Tax Officer, B-96, Shivalik, New Delhi. Vs. Ward 29(1), Pan No.Aahpb4919N Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 01Section 148Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

conceded on behalf of the Revenue that all notices issued under the new regime by invoking the six year time limit prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime will have to be dropped if the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment is less than Rupees

DCIT Circle 43(1), New Delhi vs. Charu Goel, Delhi

In the result,the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 4863/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4863/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Charu Goel, Circle 43(1), 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Co No.16/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4863/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Charu Goel, Dcit, 6/22, East Punjabi Bagh, Vs. Circle 43(1), 1704, 17Th Floor, E 2 Block, New Delhi. Pan No.Aalpg3062F Civic Centre, New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

conceded on behalf of the Revenue that all notices issued under the new regime by invoking the six year time limit prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime will have to be dropped if the income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment is less than Rupees

Maria Rojalu Pothakamuri, Narsaraopeta vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Narsaraopeta

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ld. CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee has raised various grounds challenging the assessment order. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal by raising following grounds of

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 69ASection 748

notice under section 148 issued on 07.04.2022 for the assessment year 2015-16 is barred by limitation as per the first proviso to section 149(1)(b) [new section inserted by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021] being beyond six years from the end of the assessment year ... provisions section 149(1)(b) existing upto 31.03.2021] 3. The show cause notice under section 148A(b) dated 2L.03.2022 with the prior approval of PCCII AP & Telangana, is invalid as the same has not given 7 clear days for compliance, consequently the entire reassessment proceedings are invalid and void

Asha Choudhury, Imphal vs. Income Tax Ward 1 Imphal, Imphal

ITA 303/GTY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati04 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: the date of hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 20Section 250Section 69

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 ... 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 Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, then all the notices issued between April 1

Asha Choudhury, Imphal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Imphal, Imphal

ITA 302/GTY/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati04 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: the date of hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 20Section 250Section 69

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 ... 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 Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, then all the notices issued between April 1

Late Shri Shankerlal Kesarimal Jain Represented Through Legal Heir Bharat D Dhakad, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5031/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 68

regime for assessment year 2021-2022 and before only if the time limit for issuance of such notice continued to exist under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime. 49. The first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) requires the determination of whether the time limit prescribed under section ... expired at the time of issuance of the notice. This also ensures that the new time limit of ten years prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the new regime applies prospectively. For example, for the assessment year 2012-2013, the ten year period would have expired on 31 March

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 5(3), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4987/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, Ms. Vrushti
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -5 (3), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4822/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, Ms. Vrushti
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

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

Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Itd (Jao: Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, 5(3), Mumbai)

ITA 3625/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, Ms. Vrushti
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

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

Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit, Itd (Jao: Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, 5(3), Mumbai)

ITA 3624/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, Ms. Vrushti
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

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

Brijesh Chandwani, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle -6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2020-2021 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1528/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1527 & 1528/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-2017 & 2020-2021 Brijesh Chandwani The Dcit, Circle-6(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 034 Hyderabad. Pan Adkpc1537H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Pawan Kumar Chakrapani राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: CA Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234A

case on hand, the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued for assessment year 2016-2017 which falls under section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Further, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the Specified Authority for the purposes of section 148 and 148A

Brijesh Chandwani, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle -6(1), Hyderabad

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed on this ground alone

ITA 1527/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017
For Appellant: CA Pawan Kumar ChakrapaniFor Respondent: Sri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234A

case on hand, the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued for assessment year 2016-2017 which falls under section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Further, the learned Authorised Representative of the Assessee has submitted that the Specified Authority for the purposes of section 148 and 148A

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Vrinda Farms Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4694/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Madhumita Royacit, Vs. Vrinda Farms Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-4 43, Community Centre, New Delhi Sakir Nagar So, New Friends Colony So, South East Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacv0355L Co-10/Del/2025 (In Ita No. 4694/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vrinda Farms Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 43, Community Centre, Central Circle-4 Sakir Nagar So, New New Delhi Friends Colony So, South East Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacv0355L

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, CA (though VC)For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sindhu, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

prescribed in Sections 149, 1534 and 1530C as they existed prior to the commencement of Finance Act 2021. This timeframes comprised in both Section 149(1)(b) as well as Section 153C as it existed on the is necessarily requires us to advert to the statute book prior

Ravindra Kumar Vishwanath Yadav, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4960/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2015-16 Mr. Ravindrakumar Vishwanath The Ito, Ward 28 (2)(1), Yadav, Tower 6, Vashi Railway Room No.1118, Samta Nagar Vs. Station Commercial Sector 1A, Airoli, Navi, Complex, Vashi, Mumbai – 400708 Navi Mumbai – 400703. Pan – Acbpy0748G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Dharan Gandhi. Revenue By : Shri Sunil Mathews, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.03.2024, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2015-16. 2. In This Case, The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Vide Assessment Order 11.03.2024 U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144 B Of The Act, Has Made The Addition Of Rs. 14,75,000/- Being Variation In Respect Of Unexplained Investment U/S. 69 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Mathews, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 250Section 3Section 69

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

Devender, Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Rewari

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4363/DEL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dang, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Khitesh Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 153ASection 153C

regime for assessment year 2021-2022 and before only if the time limit for issuance of such notice continued to exist under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime. 47. **** 48. Notices have to be judged according to the law existing on the date the notice is issued. Section ... under the new regime will be applicable. The three year time limit will expire on 31 March 2022. 49. The first proviso to Section 149(1)(b) requires the determination of whether the time limit prescribed under section 149(1)(b) of the old regime continues to exist

Mohd. Alam Quershi, Moradabad vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Moradabad

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 3986/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalmohd. Alam Quershi, Income Tax Officer, 0, Gol Kothi, Depduty Ganj, Ward-1(1), Moradabad-244001, Vs. Moradabad. Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Aadpq4002B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Ca & Shri P.K. Mishra, Ca Department By Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr 19.11.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A) In Short], Dated 17.02.2025 In Appeal No. Nfac/2014-15/10282979 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Dated 19.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Received That There Were Larger Credits In The Bank Account Of The Assessee & There Is Mismatch In The Income Declared By The Assessee & Credits In The Bank Account & Accordingly, Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 06.04.2021. Mohd. Alam Qureshi Vs. Ito Thereafter, In Terms Of The Order Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Union Of India Vs. Ashish Agarwal & Ors. In Civil Appeal No. 3005/2002, The Said Notice Was Treated As Notice U/S 148A(2) Of The Act. After Passing The Order U/S 148A(D) Of The Act, A Fresh Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 29.07.2022. In Response, The Assessee Filed The Return On 28.08.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 3,90,230/-. The Assessment Was Completed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144B At An Income Of Rs. 58,64,382/- By Making Addition Of Rs. 54,74,132/-.

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

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 Mohd. Alam Qureshi

Lic Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5037/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Respondent: Mr. Sunil Bhandari &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 80G

years under section On the issue of reassessment beyond 3 years under section On the issue of reassessment beyond 3 years under section 149(1)(b), the donation entry is clearly traceable in the books and 149(1)(b), the donation entry is clearly traceable in the books and 149

Signature Builders Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-04, Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 6432/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 131Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 149(1)(b)Section 153

reassessment which is sought to be commenced post 01 April 2021 would thus have to abide by the time limits prescribed by Sections 149 (1)(b), 153A or 153B as may be applicable. 13. Undisputedly, Section 149(1)(b) as it stood prior to the introduction of the amendments ... reassessment impermissible in law. 14. Viewed in light of the above, the impugned notice when tested on the anvil of the pre-amendment Section 149(1)(b) in order to be sustained would have to meet the prescription of six years. Undisputedly that period in respect

Ceb Llc (Earlier Known As Ceb Inc.), United States of America vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2025/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Ceb Llc (Earlier Known As The Assistant Commissioner Ceb Inc.), 1201, Wildson Of Income Tax, Blvd. Arlington, Va 22209, Vs Circle- 1(2)(1), International United States Taxation E-2 Block, Civic Care Of Address Centre, Minto Road, New First International Financial Delhi-110002. Centre, Level-2 Plot No. C-54 & 55, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051, Maharashtra, India. Pan- Aadct5119K Assessee Revenue

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153(1)Section 9(1)(vi)

notice dated 12.04.2022 was never served upon the assessee company and the said notice issued was beyond the limitation period in terms of section 149(1)(b) of the Act. 2.1 In this regard, the assessee submitted a list of dates alongwith the facts of the proceedings in this case ... section 148 of the Act shall be issued after the expiry of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year.  Further, section 149(1)(b) of that Act states that notice can be issued upto ten years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing

S. Lingamoorthy, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

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

ITA 1925/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1925/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri D. Rajasekaran, ITPFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 48

reopened is beyond three years, and the income being alleged to have escaped assessment is below Rs. 50 lakhs, therefore in view of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act, the case cannot be reopened and proceedings initiated u/s. 148 of the Act is to be dropped. However ... issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act was invalid since, the alleged escapement was below Rs. 50 lakhs in violation of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A), after examining the reasons recorded by the A.O, held that the A.O had recorded escapement of income