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

Syed Aneesuddin, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 598/HYD/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Syed Aneesuddin, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 7(1) Pan:Aaopu6624Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P.C. Yadav Revenue By: Sri D.J.P. Anand, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/12/2019 Order This Is Assessee’S Appeal For The A.Y 2005-06 Against The Order Of The Cit (A)-3, Hyderabad, Dated 13.02.2015. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Engaged In The Business Of Performing Civil Contract Works & Consultancy Services & Also Was A Partner In M/S Sigma Constructions, M/S. Vista Constructions As Well As In M/S. New Vista Constructions Located In Mehdipatnam, Filed His Return Of Income On 1.8.2005 Admitting A Total Income Of Rs.1,18,200/-. There Was A Survey Action U/S 133A Of The I.T. Act In The Case Of M/S. Sigma Constructions On 25.02.2010, During The Course Of Which, It Was Noticed That Other Two Concerns M/S. Vista Constructions & M/S. New Vista Constructions Are Also Functioning In The Same Premises & That Some Of The Partners Are Common In All The Three Firms. Therefore, The Cases Of M/S. Vista Constructions & M/S. New Vista Constructions Which Page 1 Of 8

For Appellant: Sri P.C. YadavFor Respondent: Sri D.J.P. Anand, DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 68

A vs. Poultry Farm & Agro Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 848/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Avs Poultry Farm & Agro Ltd., Vs. Ito, 801, 8Th Floor Vishwa Sadan Ward 1(1), Building, District Centre, New Delhi. Janakpuri, New Delhi. Pan: Aafca5032L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Mrs. Surbhi Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex Parte Order Dated 30.11.2018 Of The Cit(A)-1, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Sale & Purchase Of Shares. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 7Th September, 2010 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.26,36,075/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1). Subsequently, On The Basis Of Specific Information Received That The Assessee Has Earned Bogus Profits By Misusing The Client Code Modification Facility In F&O Segment Amounting To Rs.11,36,475/-, Proceedings U/S 147 Were Initiated & Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) Of The Act Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.37,72,550/- Where He Made An Addition Of Rs.11,36,475/-. Since None Appeared Before The Cit(A) Despite Sufficient Opportunities Granted, The Ld.Cit(A), In The Ex Parte Order Passed By Him, Upheld The Addition Made By The Ao & Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Panchanan Pradhan, Khurda vs. ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

ITA 10/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.10/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Panchanan Pradhan, Vs. Ito, Khurda Ward, Ashok Nagar, 2Nd Lane, Khurda Balugaon, Khurda स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Ajhpp 4713 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.C.Sethi, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2019 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 06.09.2016, For The Assessment Year 2009-2010, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Not Quashing The Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer Which Is Unjust, Illegal, Arbitrary, Without Jurisdiction, Contrary To The Provisions Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Herein After Referred As 'The Act') & Has Been Passed In Gross Violation Of The Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Not Quashing The Assessment Order Initiated U/S 147 Of The Act Without Having Any Reasons On The Self Same Facts, Which Has Been Considered By The Learned Assessing Officer In The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Act. 3. That, The Learned Cit (A) Has Committed Serious Error In Not Quashing The Assessment Order Wherein The Learned Assessing Officer Has Failed To Prove That The Alleged Income Escaped Owing To Failure On The Part Of The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148