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

Azizur Rahman Faizur Rahman, Mumbai vs. ITO-17(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1646/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.1646/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Azizur Rahman Faizur Rahman Ito- 17(1)(3) बिाम/ City House, Ground Floor, 55 116, Aaykar Bhavan Maruti Lane, D. N. Road, Fort, M. K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aespr-6467-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Pramod Kumar Parida– Ld Ar Revenue By : Shri Brajendra Kumar- Ld. Sr. Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 14/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 28/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2009-10 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [Cit(A)], Dated 17/01/2019 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act On 27/12/2016 On Certain Grounds. In Ground No.1, The Assessee Has Challenged The Reassessment Jurisdiction Of Ld. Ao & The Ground Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar Parida– Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Asst CIT 22(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Amolraj Printers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 634/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.634/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit-22(1) बिधम/ M/S. Amolraj Printers, 352, Room No.322, 3Rd Floor, A To Z Industrial Estate, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Mumbai-400012. Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafa1576F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Brajendra Kumar (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/08/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/10/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 15.11.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -33 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Restricting Addition Made By The A.O Amounting Rs.3,31,282/- I.E. 100% Of Total Purchase To 25%, Ignoring The Fact That The Action Of The Assessing Officer Was Based On Credible Information Received From The Maharashtra Sales Tax Department & That The Assessee During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, Failed To Prove The Genuineness Of The Purchase Transactions. A.Y.2010-11 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Has Erred In Estimating Addition On Account Of Bogus Purchase To 25% Of Such Purchases As Against The Estimation By The Ao Of 100% Of Bogus Purchases Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Had Failed To Establish The Genuineness Of The Alleged Parties From Whom Purchases Is Claimed To Have Been Made During The Year.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 148