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

Shri Suresh Chand Nahata, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 355/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 355/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2010-11 Cuke Shri Suresh Chand Nahata The Ito Vs. 1214, Partaniyon Ka Rasta Ward- 1(1) Johri Bazar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aaypn 3419 L Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena, Jcit-Dr Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 03/03/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/03/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13-12-2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2.1 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When This Appeal Was Called For Hearing Despite The Notice Was Duly Received By The Assessee As Per Acknowledgment Available On Record. The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Has Though Filed The Written Submission Vide Letter Dated 12-12-2019. 2 Shri Suresh Chand Nahata Vs Ito , Ward-1(1), Jaipur Accordingly, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, We Propose To Hear & Dispose Off This Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte By Considering

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

Sri. S. Krishnappa (HUF), Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 603/BANG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2005-06 Shri S. Krishnappa (Huf), Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.74, Bhuvaneshwari Nagar, Circle – 7(1), C. V. Raman Nagar Post, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 093. Pan : Aaphs 8136 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. Counsel Revenue By : Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, Cit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2020 O R D E R Per A.K. Garodiathis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-4, Bengaluru, Dated 20.01.2011 For The Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. In The Course Of Hearing, Learned Ar Of The Assessee Submitted List Of Dates & Synopsis Of 24 Pages & In Particular, Our Attention Was Drawn To Page 10 Of The Said Synopsis Para 26 & It Was Submitted That As Per Ground Nos.3 & 4 Raised By The Assessee Before The Tribunal, This Is The Issue Raised By The Assessee That The Huf Was Not In Existence When The Assessment Proceedings Have Been Conducted & The Assessment Order Has Been Passed On Huf & Therefore, The Entire Proceedings Are Rendered Null & Void & It Should Be Held That The Assessment Order Is Bad In Law On The Facts & Page 2 Of 7

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 148