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

Rhein Chemicals Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Kalyan

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 4655/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4655 & 4656/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2009-10) Rhein Chemicals Private Limited Ito, Ward 1(3), बनाम/ Plot No. 2, Midc, Kalyan Opp. Maliram Makharia, Badlapur Vs. (E), Kalyan-421 503 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr 8210 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. C. Jain ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 03.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: These Are Appeals By The Assessee Against The Common Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2010- 11. 2. The First Common Issue Relates To The Validity Of Reopening & The Second Common Issue Relates To The Confirmation Of Disallowance Of 100% Of Bogus Purchase Rhein Chemicals Private Limited Vs. Ito Amounting To Rs.2,90,784/- For Assessment Year 2009-10 & Rs.1,20,089/- For Assessment Year 2010-11. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: In These Years, The Assessing Officer Had Received Information From The Sales

For Appellant: Shri R. C. JainFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha
Section 147Section 148

Hindustan Unilever Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3701/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3701/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2004-05) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Hindustan Unilever Limited Dy.Commissioner Of Income (Formerly Known As Hindustan Tax –Range 1(1), Mumbai. बनाम/ Lever Ltd) Unilever House, B D Sawant Marg, Vs. Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400099 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Pan: Aaach1004N अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Ms.Jasmine Asmadwala ""यथ" क" ओर से/Revenue By : Ms.Pooja Swaroop सुनवाई क" तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.01.2018 आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)— 2, Mumbai, Dated 22.3.2016 For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : “The Appellant, Being Aggrieved By The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The "C!T(A)"] Dated March 22, 2016, Places For Your Consideration The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar and Ms.Jasmine AsmadwalaFor Respondent: Ms.Pooja Swaroop
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148