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

Bhumika Patel, Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 29(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1150/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1150/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bhumika Patel……………..……...……..…………………....Appellant 6, Burdwan Road, Block A Flat No.-4A/B, Konark Garden, Kol-27. [Pan: Alnpp8896P] Vs. Ito, Ward-29(1), Kolkata…………………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Rinsia, Ar & T N Jaiswal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 29, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 30, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.03.2025 Passed By The Nfac [In Short Cit(A)] Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief Facts Are That The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Basis Of Information Received From The Adit (Investigation), Rajkot. It Was Reported That M/S. Bhoomidev Credit Corporation Ltd. Was Engaged In Providing Accommodation Entries & The Assessee Was Identified As One Of The Beneficiaries. As Per The Investigation Findings That, A Cash Amount Of ₹75 Lakhs Was Deposited In The Books Of M/S. Bhoomidev Credit Corporation Ltd. & An Amount Of ₹66,14,712 Appeared As An Outstanding Loan In Its Balance Sheet In The Name Of The Assessee. Based On This Information, The Ao Recorded Reasons To Believe That

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

DCIT, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. Gateway Financial Services Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1146/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1146/Kol/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Central Circle-3(1), Vs Gateway Financial Services Ltd, Kolkata 2Nd Floor, Room No.209-210, Jasmine Tower, 31, Shakespeare Sarani, West Bengal-700017 Pan No. :Aabcg 1634 L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) राजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr नििााररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca सुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/07/2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 27.07.2023, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-21, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. This Appeal Is Barred By 25 Days. Looking To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Delay Of 25 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted & Disposed Off Accordingly. 3. The Only Issue Raised By The Revenue Is Against The Deleting The Addition Of Rs.15.05 Crores By The Ld. Cit(A) As Made By The Ao U/S.68 Of The Act In Respect Of Unsecured Loan Received By The Assessee During The Year.

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Trichy vs. Arulmigu Swaminatha Swami Thirukkovil, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 370/CHNY/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 370 & 368/Chny/2025 & Co Nos.32 & 33/Chny/2025 (In Ita Nos.: 370 & 368/Chny/2025) धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Arulmigu Swaminatha Swami Exemptions Ward, Trichy, Thirukkovil, Vs. The Executive Officer, Swamimalai, Kumbakonam – 612 301. [Pan: Aaata-6446-J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri. P. Krishna Kumar, J.C.I.T. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objections Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15, Vide Order Dated 20.12.2024. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objections Filed By The Assessee Were Heard & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri. P. Krishna Kumar, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 10Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147

The Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Trichy vs. Arulmigu Swaminatha Swami Thirukkovil, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 368/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 370 & 368/Chny/2025 & Co Nos.32 & 33/Chny/2025 (In Ita Nos.: 370 & 368/Chny/2025) धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Arulmigu Swaminatha Swami Exemptions Ward, Trichy, Thirukkovil, Vs. The Executive Officer, Swamimalai, Kumbakonam – 612 301. [Pan: Aaata-6446-J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri. P. Krishna Kumar, J.C.I.T. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objections Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15, Vide Order Dated 20.12.2024. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objections Filed By The Assessee Were Heard & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri. P. Krishna Kumar, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 10Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147