“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

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

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

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

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

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)

Mukesh Manekchand Sheth, Rajkot vs. The DCIT-ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 546/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

basis of so-called documents/data seized from the premises of third party and averment made in justification of compliance with the provision of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. It was submitted that provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act, empowers an authority to issue notice ... proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act is incurably and defective. In para-3 of SCN, it is stated that the provision of Section 149(1)(b) has been followed by taking approval from the specified authority. However, as submitted above, there is no mention of asset or expenditure represented

Mukesh Manekchand Sheth, Rajkot vs. The DCIT-ACIT, Central Circle-2, Rajkot

ITA 545/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

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

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

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

such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of section 149(1)(b), as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021. 15. Section 149 of the Act, prior to its amendment

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

which is beyond period of three years. However, the contention of the Ld.AO is as per the provisions of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act income escaping assessment exceeds amount of Rs. 50 lakhs beyond or more, and hence initiated re-assessment proceedings. The assessee has replied vide letter ... which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more: 8. From the plain reading of section 149(1)(b) of the Act, it is clear that unless the Assessing officer has in his possession of any documents or evidences which reveal that

Vaishali Keshav Kulkarni, Pune vs. ITO Ward 13(2), Pune

In the result the Grounds Numbers 2, 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vaishali Keshav Kulkarni, Flat No.3, Hermes Grandstand Society, Kavade Maal Sopan Baug, Pune Cantt East So., Pune 411001. Pan: Atjpk4884A Appellant/ Assessee V The Income Tax Officer, S Ward-13(2), Pune. Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kartik Natrajan – Ca/Ar Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 13.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2015-16 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Dated 05/03/2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250

Income Escaping Assessment, the Assessee's Share would have been only Rs.24,00,000/- which is less than Rs.50 lakhs. 8.1 As per Section 149(1)(b) of the Act, if more than three years have been lapsed, then Notice u/s.148 can be issued only if Value of Income Escaping

Rupesh Laldas Dhakate, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward -1, Bhandara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Chandraprakash BhutadaFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

Section 147Section 156Section 48Section 50CSection 69

income is below ` 50 lakh and notice for re– opening the assessment was issued more than three years after relevant assessment year under section 149(1)(b) of the Act provides for longer period of limitation of 10 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. “Section 149(1 ... documents or evidence reveal that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment is represented in the form of (i) an asset; [as per section 149(1)(b) by Finance Act 2021] (ii) expenditure in respect of a transaction or in relation to an event or occasion; ог [as per amended

Akshat Loyalka, Jaipur vs. Rjn-C-(101)(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 1019/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 5Section 69A

issued beyond the period of 3 years from the end of relevant assessment year unless the case clearly falls within the parameters of section 149(1)(b) for a larger period of 10 years on the fulfillment of certain additional conditions prescribed therein. In any case however, S. 149(1

Sanjay Natwarlal Desai, Mumbai vs. ITO -33(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4045/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep SagarFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(a)Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Kalpana Vijay Kadam, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 841/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.841/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Kalpana Vijay Kadam, V The Income Tax Officer, Fi 13, Janki Heights, S.No.250, S. Ward-2(2), Pune. Baner D P Road, Aundh, Pune – 411007. Maharashtra. Pan: Axzpk4350P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P. Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Manish Mehta – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 06.02.2025 For The A.Y.2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Passing An Ex-Parte Order Without Affording A Reasonable Opportunity To The Appellant. The Order Was Solely Based On The Observations Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) In The

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

Assessee’s share will be 50% of Rs.66,95,000/- i.e. Rs.33,47,500/- which is less than Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, as per Section 149(1)(b) of the Act, no notice could have been issued in the case of the assessee u/s.148 of the Act, after a period ... considered as 50%. Hence, Assessee Mrs.Kalpana Vijay Kadam’s share would have been 50% i.e. Rs.33,47,500/-. Therefore, as per Section 149(1)(b) of the Act, no Notice under section 148 can be issued in the case of Assessee after a period of three year from

Parvati Steel Re Rolling Mills Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-2, Aurangabad

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

ITA 1741/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 69A

applies to the entire Income Tax Act, PART C 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 ... 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.” 16. Finally, the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para 114 of the order has observed as under: “G. Conclusions

Mrs Nayana Ashok Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6247/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 148Section 151Section 69Section 69A

Skf India Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2518/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Bijayananda Prusethskf India Limited., 4Th Floor, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Building, Mumbai Maharashtra - 400002 ............... Appellant Pan : Aaacs0684H

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar JainFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)

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

Manojbhai Parsottambhai Poriya, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-42(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1731/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1731/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-18) Manojbhai Parsottambhai V/S. Ito – 42(1)(3), Poriya बिधम Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Flat No. 602, 6Th Floor, Kurla Complex, Bandra Thakkar Plaza, Kandivali East, Maharashtra-400051 West, Maharashtra- 400067 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Amspp6898B Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

For Appellant: Mr. Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 234BSection 250Section 270ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 69C

erred in confirming reopening of assessment without considering the fact that the proceedings for AY 2017-18 are time barred as per section 149(1)(b) of Income Tax Act, 1961 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming issue

Hetal Pagare, ACIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat, Mulund West

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed in above terms

ITA 120/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit 16(2), Vs. Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat, Room No. 481, Aayakar Bhavan, 1901, Moksh Mahal Building, Mumbai-400 020 Maharashtra-400 080 Pan: Aabpr2061D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250

represented in the form of Asset being the Vihag project, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment. Condition for reopening as stated in section 149(1)(b) of the Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat Act is satisfied as the income being interest expense of Rs. 50,25,843/- represented in the form ... analyzed, hence resulted in the favor of the Assessee. The AO stated that the condition for Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat reopening as stated in section 149(1)(b) of the Act is satisfied as the income being interest expense of Rs. 50,25,843/- represented in the form of asset being

M/S. Jindal Saw Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2759/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pranshu Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Lakhawat, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 149(1)(b)Section 69

Gupta would be less han Rs. 50 lakhs and hence, no reopening of assessment could be made beyond 3 years in terms of Section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Hence, the reassessment deserves ‘0 be quashed on this count itself for invalid assumption of jurisdiction. 4. Even on merits

Gck Stock Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 1572/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2015-2016

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 234Section 250Section 271

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 2021and 30 June 2021 pertaining to assessment years ... Provisions) Act, 2020 applies to the entire Income-taxAct, including sections 149 and 151 of the new regime. Once the first proviso to section 149(1)(b) isread with Taxation and other Laws (Relxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020,then all the notices issued between April 1

Ravi Dharampal Khanna, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1431/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh M. Bandhi, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. D/R

Section 147Section 148Section 148A

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

Dattatray Namdev Suryawanshi, Panvel vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 896/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Mr. Kaushik Makwana, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 147Section 194CSection 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 270ASection 69

relevant Assessment Year. Three years from the end of the Assessment Year 2018-19 lapsed on 31.03.2022. As per section 149(1)(b) of the Act (new regime), re-assessment proceedings could have been initiated after the expiry of three years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year only

Kanak Kumar Jain L/H of Partner of M/S. Kesariyaji Filling Station, Udaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Udaipur

ITA 67/JODH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT

Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

equated with the proper service of notice as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. The burden to establish that notice under section 149(1)(b) read with section 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the Revenue. 1.13 Though