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

Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Rajkot vs. DCIT/ACIT-2(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 925/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Oct 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 925/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 ] Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Dcit/Acit-2(1), Rajkot, Block No.B22, Shagun Residency, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Satya Sai Hospital Road, Nana Rajkot, Gujarat-360001 Mava, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Acypp0401C (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/07/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 19.06.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, Dated 11.03.2026. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Also In Law In The Dismissing Of Ground Of Appeal Relating To Initiation Of Action U/S 148 Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Also In Law In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.1,00,000/- Made By Alleging That Assessee Had Paid “On Money” Through

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Rajkot vs. DCIT/ACIT-2(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 851/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.851/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2020-21 ] Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Dcit/Acit-2(1), Rajkot, Block No.B22, Shagun Residency, Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Satya Sai Hospital Road, Nana Gujarat-360001 Mava, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Acypp0401C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2020- 21, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Dated 27.05.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, On 18.03.2025. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Also In Law In The Dismissing Of Ground Of Appeal Relating To Initiation Of Action U/S 148 Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Also In Law In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.15,00,000/- Made By Alleging That Appellant Had Paid On Money Through Cash Of Rs.15,00,000/- For Purchase Of Property In The Project R K Empire. The Addition U/S 69 Of The Act May Kindly Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Mayur Hasmukhbhai Sojitra, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in above terms

ITA 151/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 151/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Mayur Hasmukhbhai Sojitra, Income Tax Officer, C/O Murlidhar Dairy Farm, Ward-1(2)(1), Rajkot, Vs. Shivrajgadh Gate, At. Moviya, Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Rajkot, Gujarat-360311 Gujarat-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aonpr8703G (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 18.12.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, Dated 19.03.2024. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Is That Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 30,100/- U/S. 69 R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The

For Appellant: Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

Milando Fashions Limited, Ludhiana vs. Cir III(1), JCIT-III/Ldh, Ludhiana

In the result, the legal ground challenging the validity of reopening is allowed and the reassessment proceedings are quashed

ITA 632/CHANDI/2026[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Oct 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Rajesh Damodarlal Sharma, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.632/Chandi/2026 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Milando Fashions Limited Jcit – Iii, Ludhiana (Formerly Kaursain Exports Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Village Ghalewal, Rahon Road Ludhiana, Punjab – 141001 Ludhiana, Punjab – 141007 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabck-9478-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Nikhil Goyal (Advocate), Sh. Ashok Goyal (Ca) & Sh. Rishab Kapoor (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenakshi Dohare (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-09-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 07-10-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 23.01.2026 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 31.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal As Raised By The Assessee Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal (Advocate), Sh. Ashok GoyalFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Dohare (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 69C

ACIT, Circle-49(1), New Delhi vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, New Delhi

Accordingly, the addition of Rs.32,73,010/- made under section 69C in the reassessment order is hereby deleted. The grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are therefore allowed

ITA 6507/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2018-19 Acit, Circle-49(1), Vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, 1505, E-2 Block, 70B/06, Rama Road, Industrial Area, S.P. Mukherjee, Civic Center, Ramesh Nagar, Delhi 110015. New Delhi, Delhi 110002. Pan No. Acspc9675M Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, Acit, Circle-49(1), 1505, E-2 Block, 70B/06, Rama Road, Industrial Area, S.P. Mukherjee, Civic Center, Ramesh Nagar, Delhi 110015. New Delhi, Delhi 110002. Pan No. Acspc9675M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv. Revenue By Shri Novel Roy, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.09.2026 Pronouncement On 07.10.2026 O R D E R Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. These Two Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2018-19 (Ita 6506) & Ay 2019-20 (Ita 6507). Since These Two Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Hence, We Deem It Fit To Dispose Of The Two Cases Through A Single Order. 2. Ita 6506 Arises From Order Dated 24.03.2026, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereafter As “The Act”), By Nfac. Ita 6507 Arises From Order Dated 24.03.2026, Passed U/S 250 Of The Act, By Nfac.

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

ACIT, Circle-49(1), New Delhi vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, New Delhi

Accordingly, the addition of Rs.32,73,010/- made under section 69C in the reassessment order is hereby deleted. The grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are therefore allowed

ITA 6506/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Sanjay Awasthiassessment Year: 2018-19 Acit, Circle-49(1), Vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, 1505, E-2 Block, 70B/06, Rama Road, Industrial Area, S.P. Mukherjee, Civic Center, Ramesh Nagar, Delhi 110015. New Delhi, Delhi 110002. Pan No. Acspc9675M Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Kuldeep Chhabra, Acit, Circle-49(1), 1505, E-2 Block, 70B/06, Rama Road, Industrial Area, S.P. Mukherjee, Civic Center, Ramesh Nagar, Delhi 110015. New Delhi, Delhi 110002. Pan No. Acspc9675M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv. Revenue By Shri Novel Roy, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.09.2026 Pronouncement On 07.10.2026 O R D E R Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. These Two Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2018-19 (Ita 6506) & Ay 2019-20 (Ita 6507). Since These Two Appeals Pertain To The Same Assessee, Hence, We Deem It Fit To Dispose Of The Two Cases Through A Single Order. 2. Ita 6506 Arises From Order Dated 24.03.2026, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereafter As “The Act”), By Nfac. Ita 6507 Arises From Order Dated 24.03.2026, Passed U/S 250 Of The Act, By Nfac.

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C