Which cases are most cited on Section 148A(b)?

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 506) — 156 citing judgments; CIT v. K.G. Rukminiamma (331 ITR 211) — 104 citing judgments; Mis Yahoo India Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), Standard Chartered Bank (307 ITR 59) — 90 citing judgments; Vishakapatnam in Smt. Bommana Swarna Rekha v. A. CIT (147 Taxmann 59) — 70 citing judgments; Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes (174 Taxmann.com 144) — 70 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 148A(b)?

BharatTax indexes 524 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act?

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 506) is the decision most relied on for Section 148A(b), cited in 156 judgments. One cannot make a taxable profit or loss from transactions with oneself, as profit only arises from dealings with external third parties, even when transferring assets between different accounts or divisions of the same entity.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.281

Section 148A(b) falls under section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 281 (Procedure before issuance of notice under section 280) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 281 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 148A(b) is Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT (24 ITR 506), cited in 156 of the 524 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148A(b)

Sir Kikabhai Premchand v. CIT

24 ITR 506 · 1953 · Supreme Court

156

citing judgments

One cannot make a taxable profit or loss from transactions with oneself, as profit only arises from dealings with external third parties, even when transferring assets between different accounts or divisions of the same entity.

CIT v. K.G. Rukminiamma

331 ITR 211 · 2011 · High Court

104

citing judgments

For capital gains exemption under Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act (prior to the 2015 amendment), the expression "a residential house" includes multiple residential units and should not be construed in the singular, by applying Section 13 of the General Clauses Act.

Mis Yahoo India Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), Standard Chartered Bank

307 ITR 59 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

Vishakapatnam in Smt. Bommana Swarna Rekha v. A. CIT

147 Taxmann 59 · 2005 · Reported

citing judgments

Deepak Steel and Power Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxes

174 Taxmann.com 144 · 2025 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Reassessment notices issued after April 1, 2021, for Assessment Year 2015-16 are time-barred. The relaxation provided by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, does not extend the period of limitation for such notices.

State of A P v. A P Pensioners Association

13 SCC 161 · 2005 · Reported

citing judgments

Legal fictions are to be construed to enable the person for whose benefit they are created to obtain all flowing consequences. This principle applies when determining procedures for reassessment under Section 148, including decisions under Section 149A(d) and issuing notices within the surviving time limit.

Gurdas Garg v. CIT

63 Taxmann.com 289 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 40A(3) can be dispensed with if the assessee proves business expediency for cash payment and verifies the genuineness of the transaction, even if it doesn't fall under Rule 6DD.

ATS Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT

166 Taxmann.com 61 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Once an addition made based on original reasons recorded for reopening is deleted, other additions not part of those original reasons cannot be sustained.

CIT v. Micron Steels (P.) Ltd.

372 ITR 386 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

A statutory notice issued in the name of a non-existent entity renders the entire assessment a nullity in the eyes of law.

Giridhar Gopal Dalmia Vs.Union of India v. Ors7

156 Taxmann.com 478 · 2024 · Reported

citing judgments

High Courts have allowed writ petitions in favour of assessees concerning issues of jurisdiction.

Judgments on Section 148A(b)

Saket Sushil Tibrewal, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 58/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

Vineet Arya, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the asessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 1445/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 3(1)Section 68

Jalpaiguri Zilla Regulated Market Committee, Jalpaiguri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Jalpaiguri

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2732/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2732/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jalpaiguri Zilla Regulated Market Committee..…………………..………………....…………………....Appellant Jalpaiguri Sadar, Jalpaiguri, W.B 735101.. [Pan: Aacaj0159Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Jalpaiguri...…….……....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Pradeep Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Satyajit Mandal, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 03, 2026 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 19.09.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That In The Case Of The Assessee Information Was Received By The Assessing Officer That The Assessee Had Deposited Substantial Cash In Its Savings Bank Account Maintained With Indian Overseas Bank During The Assessment Year 2016–17. It Is An Admitted Fact That The Assessee Did Not File Any Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, Proceedings Under Section 148A Of The Act Were Initiated. Show-Cause Notice Under Section 148A(B) Was Issued & Thereafter An Order Under Section

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Mahesh Kumar Bhati, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1860/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: transfer making it a long term capital asset whereas the A.O. has treated the same as short term capital asset. 4. The assessment made by learned A.O. and upheld by the CIT(A) is incorrect as while computing capital gains indexed cost of acquisition has not been considered leading to excess assessment. 7. For these and other ground which may be raised during OR before the

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Galax Minerals (P) Ltd., Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer 10(1), New Delhi, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2894/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalm/S Galax Minerals (P)Ld. Vs. Income Tax Officer 591, 2Nd Floor, Udyog Ward-10(1) Vihar, Phase-V, Industrial New Delhi Complex Dundahera, Gurugram, 122016 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcg7346K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT, DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

Janakee Petrolium, Satara vs. ITO WD-4, Satara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2327/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2322 & 2327/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Janakee Petrolium, V Income Tax Officer, Gat No.1041/B, Wai Surru S Ward-4, Satara. Roadk Kavathe Wai, Satara – 415516 Pan: Aajfj9486C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Tanzil Padvekar Revenue By Smt Neha Thakur (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Both Dated 20.08.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Act, Dated 22.02.2023 & Penalty Order Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act, 10.08.2023

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Janakee Petrolium, Satara vs. ITO WD-4, Satara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2322/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

Khushnud Ansari, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1612/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1612/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Khushnud Ismail Ansari, V Income Tax Officer, 4A, J K Centre Solapur Bazar, S Ward-7(1), Pune. Near Arihant College, Camp, Pune – 411001. Pan: Aaipa2202J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Krishna V Gujarathi Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – Virtual Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac],Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 17.02.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 19.05.2023. Ita No.1612/Pun/2025 [A]

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250

Jet Speed Realtors, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 7537/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 43C

Ldm Agro Foods Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4347/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri R S Singhavi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 145Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 37(1)

Kesarinath Ram Gaikwad, Raigad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2139/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath

Section 10(37)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

Ritu Kalpesh Hiran, Satara vs. ITO, Satara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1649/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151ASection 69A

Haywizz Havelock Island Resort, Port Blair vs. ITO, Ward 3(4), Port Blair

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2255/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148ASection 194Section 250

Vaibhav Tewari, Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7737/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Prusethvaibhav Tewari, Vs. Cit(A), Kautilya Bhawan, Mumbai- 88 Krishna Niwas, Society 400051. Park Narhi, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226001. Pan/Gir No: Aecpt2741P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 80D

Sachin Dattatray Jadhav, Satara vs. ITO Ward-3, Satara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2617/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar N. KashirsagarFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2Section 69A

Sapana Dharmendra Shah, Malegaon vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Malegaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2217/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2217/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sapana Dharmendra Shah, The Income Tax Officer, Khodiyar Bhavan, Ramsetu, Ward – 1, Malegaon Opp. Gayatri Mangal Karyala, Vs. Malegaon, Nashik-423203 Pan : Belps3009B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanjeev Mutha (Virtual) Department By : Shri Manish Mehta Date Of Hearing : 20-01-2026 Date Of 27-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.08.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2018-19. 2. Briefly Stated The Facts Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Did Not File His Return Of Income For Ay 2018-19. Based On The Information Flagged By The Cbdt Through Insight Portal Under The Head “Nms Category”, It Was Found That During The Relevant Ay 2018-19, The Assessee Had Deposited Cash Of Rs.2,91,03,000/- In Her Bank Account Maintained With The Malegaon Merchant‟S Co-Op Bank Ltd. In The Name Of M/S Shree Kakaji Masale & Foods. Further, There Is Also Tds Made To The Tune Of Rs.1,524/- U/S 194A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) On „Interest Other Than „Interest On Securities‟ Against A Total Credit Of Rs.15,240/- By The Malegaon Merchant‟S Co-Op Bank Ltd., Which Has Not Been Disclosed To The Department. Since, The Assessee Had Not Filed Her Return Of Income, Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Was Issued On 05.04.2022 Which Was Duly Served Upon The Assessee. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Did Not File Her Return Of Income. Thereafter, Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act As Well As Show Cause Notice Were Issued, In Response To Which The Assessee Filed Certain

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Mutha (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 69A