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

Muse Farms Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4082/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Muse Farms Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Assessment Unit (Itd), B-2/201 Basement, Delhi Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi Pan: Aahcm1513E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sanjeev Khurana, Ca Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short, The “Cit(A)/Nfac”], Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1076003088(1), Dated 02.05.2025 Involving Proceedings Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. We Notice During The Course Of Hearing That There Arises The First & Foremost Issue Of Validity Of The Impugned Reopening Itself Set Into Motion By The Learned Assessing Officer Vide Section 148 Notice Issued On 27.07.2022. This Is For The Precise Reason That The Department Already Appears To Have Conceded The Very Issue Of Limitation Aspect In Union Of India Vs Rajiv Bansal (2024) 469 Itr 46 (Sc) That The Provision Of Taxation & Other Laws [Relaxation & Amendment Of Certain Provisions] Act, 2020 “Tola” Would Not Apply For Assessment Year 2013-14 Herein. It Further Emerges That The Very Issue Between The Parties Is No More Res Integra In Light Of The Tribunal’S Recent Learned Coordinate Bench’S Order Dated 23.07.2025 Passed In Ita No. 2307/Del/2025 (Sh. Deepak Agarwal Vs. Dcit) Having Quashed A Similar Reopening Therein, Reading As Under:

Section 147Section 148

Pradip Naik, Goa vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 43, New Delhi

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

ITA 1497/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Pradip Naik Vs Ito Bungalow No.25, International Goa Housing Board, Taxation-2(2)(2) Behind Sai Service Station, New Delhi Bardex, North Goa-403521 Pan-Afvpn7030H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Madhur Agarwal, Adv. (Through Vc) & Ms. Sakshi Goyal, Ca Respondent By Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.06.2022 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-43, [“Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. 10054/2020-21 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 17.12.2019 U/S 144(1)/147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment Was Completed U/S 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Act. The Ao Had Information In His Possession That Assessee Had Made Deposits Of Inr 3,75,00,000/- In The Bank Account But Had Not Filed The Return Of Income Therefore, The Case Of The Assessee Was Re-Opened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 28.03.2019. Thereafter, Since The Assessee Had Not Participated In The Proceedings Nor Made Any Compliance, Ao Has Held That Investments Made In Mutual Funds Totaling To Inr 3,25,00,000/-, Source Of Which Remained Unexplained & Accordingly, Made The Addition Of Such Amount Made U/S 69B Of The Act.

Section 144Section 144(1)Section 148Section 250Section 69B