Section 148 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.280

Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 35,022 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

Judgments on Section 148

Archana Pranav Desai, Valsad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vapi

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

ITA 558/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.557/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Pranav Dolatrai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Desai Bunglow, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2160R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.558/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Archana Pranav Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Pranav Bunglos, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2161Q (Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 148

Pranav D. Desai, Surat vs. ITO Vapi Ward, 7 Vapi, Vapi

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

ITA 557/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.557/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Pranav Dolatrai Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Desai Bunglow, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2160R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.558/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Archana Pranav Desai, Vs. The Ito, Ward-7, Pranav Bunglos, Gautam Colony, Vapi. Balakhadi, Killa Pardi, Valsad-396125. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpd2161Q (Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To The Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 148

K.T.A & G.R.S Educational Trust, Vellore vs. ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 and 2011-12 are dismissed

ITA 1200/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1197 To 1200/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12) K.T.A & G.R.S. Educational Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer Mgr Nagar, Patchur Post, (Exemptions), Natrampalli, Ward-1. Vellore. Chennai. Pan: Aaifk 8399Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. I.Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per G.Manjunatha, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai, Dated 20.02.2019 & Pertain To Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr. I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

K.T.A & G.R.S Educational Trust, Vellore vs. ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 and 2011-12 are dismissed

ITA 1199/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1197 To 1200/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12) K.T.A & G.R.S. Educational Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer Mgr Nagar, Patchur Post, (Exemptions), Natrampalli, Ward-1. Vellore. Chennai. Pan: Aaifk 8399Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. I.Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per G.Manjunatha, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai, Dated 20.02.2019 & Pertain To Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr. I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

K.T.A & G.R.S Educational Trust, Vellore vs. ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 and 2011-12 are dismissed

ITA 1198/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1197 To 1200/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12) K.T.A & G.R.S. Educational Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer Mgr Nagar, Patchur Post, (Exemptions), Natrampalli, Ward-1. Vellore. Chennai. Pan: Aaifk 8399Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. I.Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per G.Manjunatha, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai, Dated 20.02.2019 & Pertain To Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr. I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

K.T.A & G.R.S Educational Trust, Vellore vs. ITO (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 and 2011-12 are dismissed

ITA 1197/CHNY/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1197 To 1200/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12) K.T.A & G.R.S. Educational Trust Vs The Income Tax Officer Mgr Nagar, Patchur Post, (Exemptions), Natrampalli, Ward-1. Vellore. Chennai. Pan: Aaifk 8399Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. I.Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per G.Manjunatha, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai, Dated 20.02.2019 & Pertain To Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2009-10 & 2011-12. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr. I.Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148