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)

Travelport Global Distribution System Bv, Netherland vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1628/DEL/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Travelport Global Distribution Vs Assistant Commissioner Of System Bv, Taurusavenue Income Tax, Circle 33A-2132 Ls, Po Box 3064- International Taxation 1(3)(1) 2130Kb, Hoofddrop, The Civic Centre, Minto Road, Netherlands, Netherland New Delhi Pan: Aaccg2258D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. S. K. Agarwal, Adv, Sh. Vibha Bansal, Ca & Sh. Arihant Jain, Ca Revenue By Sh. Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Final

Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 4Section 44C

Balwinder Kaur, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Moga

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 593/ASR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 593/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Ms. Balwinder Kaur Ito- बनाम/ Patti Machhiki Machhike, Ward-1 Machhike Nihal Singh Wala, Moga-142039 Vs. Moga-142039, Punjab Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./Pan. Gzwpk-8896-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Shri Manoj Kumar (Ca) - Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

Anguri Devi Khandelwal (Radha Mohan Khandelwal (Legal Heir), Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle-4, Jaipur

ITA 389/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, Ld. C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurva Awasthi, Ld. JCIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148A

Sollfege Electronics Private Limited (Presently Known As Sollfege Electronics Limited), Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 8(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1012/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1012/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Sollfege Electronics Private Vs Ito Ward 8(2), Limited P-7, Chowringhee Square, (Presently Known As Sollfege Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Electronics Limited) 3, Pretoria Street, 2Nd Floor, Chandrakunj Building, Kolkata-700071, West Bengal Pan No. :Aaecd4463B (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocates रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.03.2025, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld.Counsel For The Assessee Pressed The Grounds No.8, 9, 10 & 11, Which Are Raised By The Assessee To Challenge The Confirmation Of Addition By The Ld. Cit(A) Of Rs.60.00 Lakhs Made By The Assessing Officer U/S.68 Of The Act As Unexplained Cash Credit. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Electronics Audio, Video Etc. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income U/S.139(1) Of The Act On 06.10.2018 Declaring Total Income At Rs.95,23,889/-. The Notice U/S.148A(B) Of The Act Was Issued By The Assessing

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury & ShriFor Respondent: Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Shambu Dayal Modi, Modi Plastic Udyog vs. Assessing Officer, ITO Ward

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

ITA 168/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.168/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shambu Dayal Modi………….……………............................……….……Appellant Modi Plastic Udyog, Mini Shed No.-31, 32, Phase-Iii, Adityapur Industrial Area, Adityapur, Jamshedpur, Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand-832109, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 832109. [Pan: Akxpm9308G] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Jamshedpur...…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 15, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 19.03.2025 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2018–19 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹5,45,350/-. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Received Information That The Assessee Was Allegedly Involved In Gst Evasion By Facilitating Purchases Without Actual Movement Of Goods. As Per The Information Received From The Gst Database, The Assessee Had Shown Purchases Amounting To ₹13,12,816/- From M/S. Tumbqun Plastic During The Year Under Consideration. Based On This Information, The Assessing Officer Initiated Proceedings Under Section 148A(B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Pankaj Kumar, Karnal vs. CIT (Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 173/GTY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Daljit Singh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Zeba Ajmal Pothiwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(2) (6), Surat

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

ITA 877/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Chinmoy Mondal, Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1148/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Acit, Circle-1, Burdwan Chinmoy Mondal Asst. Commissioner Of Income C/O S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Tax, Circle 1, Burdwan, Aaykar Advocates 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Bhawan Poorva, Kachari Road, Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Court Compound, P.O. & P.S. Vs. Street, Kolkata-700001, Burdwan, Dist. Purba West Bengal Barddhaman-713101, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adzpm8111E Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subrata Aich, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subrata Aich, DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148A

Manimozhian Vaideki, Sivagangai vs. ACIT, International Taxation Circle, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2025/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2025/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17 Manimozhian Vaideki, The Assistant Commissioner No.77, Ward-1, Devappattu Vs. Of Income Tax, Kallal, International Taxation Circle, Sivagangai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-630 305. [Pan:Azcpv7593C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(a)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata vs. Flex Trade Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1828/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

Abid Mustafa Khan, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 502/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleabid Mustafa Khan, 301, Mayfair Residency, Raj Nagar Opp. Green Park, Nagpur 440 013, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aqipk9595G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(2), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

Sana Md.Saqib Puthawala, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 624/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

Jharkhand State Bar Council, Ranchi vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Ranchi

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 13/RAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjharkhand State Bar Council, I.T.O., Bunglow No. 8, North Office Para, Ward 1(1), Vs. Doranda, Ranchi-834002. Ranchi. Pan No. Aacaj 0989 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 148Section 148A

Kanigere Ramegowda Ningaraju, Hassan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Hassan

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

ITA 1046/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V Shivarama Iyer, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263Section 269SSection 45

Vijay Kumar Kamdar, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Adilabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 618/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.618/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2016-2017 Vijay Kumar Kamdar, The Income Tax Adilabad - 504 001. Vs. Officer, Ward-1, Telangana. Adilabad - 504 001. Pan Ajmpk2305D Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca A Srinivas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Sri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: CA A SrinivasFor Respondent: : Sri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR

Section 148Section 148A