BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

3,549 results for “TDS”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai826Delhi737Bangalore293Hyderabad244Chennai238Ahmedabad191Pune137Kolkata123Jaipur120Chandigarh96Cochin74Indore58Raipur54Rajkot46Visakhapatnam43Surat41Nagpur35Lucknow35Patna27Guwahati25Bombay24Amritsar17Agra14Jodhpur9Cuttack8Jabalpur8Panaji6Allahabad6Dehradun5Ranchi5SC4

Key Topics

Section 14891Section 14786Section 143(3)81Section 26367Addition to Income62Section 153A57Section 6839Section 153C33Section 25023TDS22Reopening of Assessment

HEXAWARE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(1)(2) MUMBAI AND 4 ORS

WP/1778/2023HC Bombay03 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAMHON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80J

Section 149 of the Act has to be seen with respect to the original notice under Section 148 of the Act, which was issued to petitioner on 8th April 2021 and as the said notice was issued within the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which was expiring on 31st March 2022, the reassessment

SEJAL JEWELLARY AND ANR vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

Showing 1–20 of 3,549 · Page 1 of 178

...
21
Disallowance19
WP/3057/2019
HC Bombay
18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SHINESHILPI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LITED. vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS.

WP/3297/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

NEELAM PROMOD MEHTA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.

WP/3448/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

ASHOKKUMAR BHANWARLAL TATTED vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.

WP/3518/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

REKHA RAJNEESH MEHTA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

WP/3449/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

PRAMOD SURENDRA KUMAR MEHTA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS

WP/3450/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

UNITOUCH CREATIONS LLP vs. UNION OF INDIA AND3 ORS.

WP/3488/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SYMPHONY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

WP/442/2022HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SYMPHONY PRIVATE COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

WP/490/2022HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

KHYALILAL MOHANLAL TATER vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS.

WP/3206/2019HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SYMPHONY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

WP/544/2022HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SYMPHONY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS

WP/468/2022HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

SHILPIN KHYALILAL TATER vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.

WP/50/2020HC Bombay18 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE JUSTICE ADVAIT M. SETHNA

Section 132Section 147Section 148

148 of the I.T. Act inter alia stating that there are reasons to believe, that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 had escaped assessment, within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act. Hence, it was proposed to assess/reassess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year. The petitioner was called upon to file

CHEMOX EXPORTS IMPORTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

ITA 3954/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nMs. Jigna Jain, A/RFor Respondent: \nShri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

148 of the Act for\nissuance of notice and in a faceless manner, to the extent provided in section\n144B of the Act with reference to making assessment or reassessment of total income\nor loss of assessee. The impugned notice dated 27th August, 2022 has been\nissued by respondent no. 1 (JAO) and not by the NFAC, which

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(INTERNATIONAL TAX) 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2751/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri Anish Thacker & Shri Nishit Shah, A/RFor Respondent: \nShri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 5(2)Section 9(1)Section 9(1)(v)

TDS on the said remittances. Taking a leaf\nout of this information, the AO was of the opinion that the assessee\nhas not shown this income in its return of income as taxable and\nformed a belief that income of Rs.91,08,957/-, had escaped assessment\nand issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29/06/2021. Drawing support\nfrom

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 772/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

section 148 before making the assessment u/s 147, the AO is required to serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish return of his income. Thus service of notice u/s 148 is a condition precedent to make the assessment u/s 147. In the present case as evident from the assessment order, AO issued notice u/s 148

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1311/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 37(1)

148 of the Act, dated 27/03/2021 and called upon it to furnish the reply to the remaining 5 Sanghi Textiles Privarte Limited vs. ITO queries on or before 25/03/2022. In reply, the assessee company filed its written submissions along with some documents and further sought a time of 15 days for furnishing the required information. The AO, after perusing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1812/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Suhas Bora and Riya OswalFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 37Section 68

TDS certificates / 15G forms for verification. The assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. The invocation of 6 CO No.43/PUN/2025 provisions of section 115BBE of the Act was also challenged before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 8. Based on the arguments advanced by the assessee

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 771/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

section 148 before making the assessment u/s\n147, the AO is required to serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish return\nof his income. Thus service of notice u/s 148 is a condition precedent to make the\nassessment u/s 147. In the present case as evident from the assessment order, AO\nissued notice u/s 148