Section 148(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.280

Section 148(1) falls under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 280 (Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 280 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 148(1) is Dr. Shashi Kant Garg v. CIT (285 ITR 158), cited in 42 of the 38 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148(1)

Dr. Shashi Kant Garg v. CIT
285 ITR 158 · 2006 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated by a notice under Section 148 are invalid if the requisite sanction or approval under Section 151 is not obtained from the proper competent authority. This fundamental defect is substantive and cannot be cured.

Pannabai v. CIT
170 ITR 80 · 1988 · High Court
31
citing judgments

When a return is filed as an artificial juridical person, the assessee cannot be treated as an association of persons, making any order to that effect without jurisdiction.

Cit v. Independent Mdia (P) Ltd.
210 Taxmann 14 · 2012 · High Court
19
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer (AO) is not required to prove that share money originated from the assessee's own funds; Section 68 of the Income Tax Act does not place such a burden on the AO.

R.K. Upadhyaya v. Shanabhai P. Patel
253 ITR 334 · 2002 · High Court
10
citing judgments
CIT v. Jagdish Prasad\nChoudhary
211 ITR 472 · 1995 · High Court
9
citing judgments
CIT v. Avtar Singh
304 ITR 333 · 2008 · High Court
6
citing judgments
CIT vs. Chetan Gupta (2015) 126 DTR 401 (Del.), CIT v. Mani Kakar 18 DTR (Del) 145 and Smt. S. Nachiar vs. ITO
326 ITR 77 · 2010 · High Court
6
citing judgments
CIT v. Laxmi Narain
168 Taxmann 128 · 2008 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Harjeet Surajprakash Girotra v. Union of India
108 Taxmann.com 491 · 2019 · High Court
3
citing judgments
Commodities (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT
154 Taxmann.com 292 · 2023 · High Court
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 148(1)

M/S Sulaikha Clay Mines, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 937/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 627/COCH/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 626/COCH/2022[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 625/COCH/2022[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 624/COCH/2022[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sulaikha Clay Mines, Thiruvananthapuram vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2), Thiruvananthapuram

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 623/COCH/2022[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Sri.John Mathew N, Alappuzha vs. The ITO, WD-2, Alappuzha

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 81/COCH/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri John Mathew N. The Income Tax Officer Neroth House Ward - 2, Alleppey Vs. No. 1, Jubilee Road Alappuzha [Pan: Acupm8885D] Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair & Shri P.K. Biju, Advocates Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 03.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Appeal By The Assessee Challenges The Validity Of The Reassessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 20.11.2007 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2001-02, Since Upheld In First Appeal Vide Order Dated 24.01.2018 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kottayam (‘Cit(A)’ For Short). 2.1 At The Outset, Shri Anil D. Nair, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee-Appellant, Would Submit That The Basis Of The Assessee’S Challenge Is Two-Fold: (A) Non-Supply Of The Reasons Recorded; & (B) True & Full Disclosure Of All Material Facts Relating To The Income Escaping Assessment By The Assessee Per His Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair &For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(2)Section 230ASection 234B

Alok Kumar Jain, Sagar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 38/JAB/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 151Section 263

Suraj Singh, Sidhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Rewa

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 61/JAB/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 271F

Suraj Singh, Sidhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Rewa

In the result, both the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 60/JAB/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 271F

Avnish Kumar Gupta, Sidhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Rewa

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 56/JAB/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Avnish Kumar Gupta, Sidhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Rewa

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/JAB/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Sh. Subash Chander, Udhampur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Udhampur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 143/ASR/2017[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 1993-94

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No.142 & 143/Asr/2017 Assessment Years: 1992-93 & 1993-94

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Arora (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148(1)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Sh. Subash Chander, Udhampur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Udhampur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 142/ASR/2017[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 1992-93

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No.142 & 143/Asr/2017 Assessment Years: 1992-93 & 1993-94

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Arora (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148(1)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

M/S Nice Telecom, Mansa vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Mansa

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 153/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 153/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. I. S. Khurana (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 2Section 271(1)(c)

Income Tax Officer Ward-5(1), Baroda vs. Baroda Cricket Association

Appeals are disposed of accordingly

TAXAP/66/2007HC Gujarat09 Dec 2014
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Metrochem Industries Ltd

Appeal is disposed of

TAXAP/1124/2006HC Gujarat27 Nov 2014
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148(1)

Ganesh Textiles vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITR/96/1985HC Gujarat07 Sept 2000
Section 143Section 148Section 256Section 271