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 Shantilal Jain, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1063/RJT/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Dec 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1063/Rjt/2009 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2002-03) बनाम/ Shri Shantilal Jain, I.T.O, 41, Usha, Ward-2, Vs. 161, S.V.Road, Bhuj. Vile Parle(West) Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaepj8434B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 19/09/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 10/12/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Ii, Rajkot [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Dated 02/09/2009, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 29/12/2006 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2002-03. A.Y. 2002-03 The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

Shri M. Abdul Gani, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (1), Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2354/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Shri M. Abdul Gani, Income Tax Officer No.93, South Avani Moola Street, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1), Madurai – 625 001. Vs. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Cr Building, [Pan: Aalpa 6445L] Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Ita Nos.10 To 13/2018-19 Dated 03.07.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita Nos. 2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 :- 2 -: 2. Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee & Ms. R. Anita, Jcit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

Shri M. Abdul Gani, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (1), Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2353/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Shri M. Abdul Gani, Income Tax Officer No.93, South Avani Moola Street, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1), Madurai – 625 001. Vs. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Cr Building, [Pan: Aalpa 6445L] Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Ita Nos.10 To 13/2018-19 Dated 03.07.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita Nos. 2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 :- 2 -: 2. Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee & Ms. R. Anita, Jcit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

Shri M. Abdul Gani, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (1), Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2352/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Shri M. Abdul Gani, Income Tax Officer No.93, South Avani Moola Street, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1), Madurai – 625 001. Vs. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Cr Building, [Pan: Aalpa 6445L] Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Ita Nos.10 To 13/2018-19 Dated 03.07.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita Nos. 2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 :- 2 -: 2. Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee & Ms. R. Anita, Jcit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

Shri M. Abdul Gani, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (1), Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2351/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Shri M. Abdul Gani, Income Tax Officer No.93, South Avani Moola Street, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1), Madurai – 625 001. Vs. 2, V.P. Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Cr Building, [Pan: Aalpa 6445L] Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Madurai Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Ita Nos.10 To 13/2018-19 Dated 03.07.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Ita Nos. 2351, 2352, 2353 & 2354/Chny/2019 :- 2 -: 2. Mr. S. Sriniranjani, Advocate Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee & Ms. R. Anita, Jcit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A