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

DCIT Cercle-1, Kalyan vs. Bhave Engineering Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed accordingly

ITA 1913/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1913/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Circle-1 बिधम/ Bhave Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza C/O. D. C. Bothra & Co. Vs. Llp (Ca) (Formerly Known Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada, As D. C 297, Tardeo Road, Kalyan-West-421301 Wille Mansion, 1St Floor, . Opp Bank Of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1818/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Bhave Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-1 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza C/O. D. C. Bothra & Co. Llp Vs. (Ca) (Formerly Known As D. Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada, C 297, Tardeo Road, Wille Kalyan-West-421301 Mansion, 1St Floor, Opp Bank Of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb7065K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajkumar Singh Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Joshi (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/12/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/03/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 16.01.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Joshi (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

Shri Manoj Kanhaiyalal Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-17(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5993/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5993/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Manoj Kanhaiyalal Agarwal बिधम/ Acit, Circle-17(2) 100-104, D. G. Chambers, Room No.123A, Aayakar Vs. 2Nd Floor, Nanik Motwani Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Marg, Fort, Mumbai- 400023. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpa3100A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Shivaram (Ar) Revenue By: Shri Bharat Andhale (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/03/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 18.07.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. Reopening Is Bad In Law 1. The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Notice U/S.148 Dtd.31/03/2016 Was Issued On The Basis Of Information Received From Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad, Thus There Was No Independent Application Of Mind By The A.O. It Is Simply Based On Borrowed Satisfaction Of Some

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram (AR)For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Shri Praveen Kumar, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1176/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1176/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2010-11 Shri Praveen Kumar, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-9, Sundar Nagar, Patel Marg- Ward 6(2) West, Mansarovar, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Azhpk 8063 B Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri S.S. Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/02/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 2, Jaipur Dated 22/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 147/144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Ld. Cit(A)-2 Has Grossly Erred In Law As Well As In Facts In Addition Of Amount Of Rs. 11,31,800/-. Ld. Cit(A)-2 Has Grossly Erred In Law As Well As In Facts For Not Appreciating The Documents/Information Furnished During The Course Of Proceedings & It Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Order U/S 147/144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Completely Perverse & Baseless & Is Liable To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Choudhary (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S Kundali Jewel (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 3511/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3511/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Kundali Jewels (India) बिधम/ The Income Tax Officer 12 Pvt. Ltd. (3)(1) Vs. Room No.147 A, 1St Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tower, Thakur Village, Kandivali Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. (E), Mumbai. Marg, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4337/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Income Tax Officer 12 बिधम/ M/S. Kundali Jewels (India) (3)(1) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Room No.147 A, 1St Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Thakur Village, Kandivali Marg, Mumbai-400020. (E), Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Pnek10340B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant C. Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Gurbinder Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm) The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.3511/Mum/2019 4337/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant C. ModiFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 40