Section 148A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.281

Section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46), cited in 713 of the 3,543 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148A

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal
469 ITR 46 · 2024 · Supreme Court
713
citing judgments

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.
326 ITR 1 · 2010 · Supreme Court
543
citing judgments

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
444 ITR 1 · 2022 · Supreme Court
524
citing judgments

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala
245 ITR 360 · 2000 · Supreme Court
361
citing judgments

An order refusing special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, whether speaking or non-speaking, does not attract the doctrine of merger, meaning the order under challenge is not substituted.

Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT
464 ITR 430 · 2024 · High Court
288
citing judgments
Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO
156 Taxmann.com 178 · 2023 · High Court
213
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if the Income Tax Department fails to follow the prescribed procedures, including obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 or adhering to the faceless assessment scheme mandates under section 151A.

Varghese v. ITO, Ernakulum
4 SCC 173 · 1981 · Reported
164
citing judgments

Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act are legally binding on the revenue authorities in their administration and implementation. This binding character applies even if the circulars depart from the correct interpretation of the law and cannot be ignored to the prejudice of the assessee.

Gramaphone Co. of India Ltd. v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey
132 Taxmann 373 · 2003 · Supreme Court
146
citing judgments
(P.) Ltd. v. ITO
221 ITR 538 · 1996 · Supreme Court
125
citing judgments

The sanction of a specified authority under Section 151 is a mandatory procedural check before issuing a notice under Section 148. This procedural safeguard aims to prevent mechanical reopening of assessments and harassment of the assessee.

Shanmugavel Nadar v. State of Tamil Nadu
263 ITR 658 · 2003 · Supreme Court
122
citing judgments

The doctrine of merger applies when appellate jurisdiction is invoked, causing the operative part of a lower court's order or decree to merge into the superior court's order, whether it reverses, modifies, or affirms the original decision. The application of this doctrine depends on the nature of the appellate or revisional order, the scope of statutory provisions, and the subject matter challenged.

Judgments on Section 148A

M/S. Dna Media Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer 2(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 216/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Jul 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 M/S Dna Media Pvt. Ltd., 16/3, Vs. The Income Tax Officer- 2(1), Gha, Sarojni Naidu Marg, Lucknow-New Lucknow Lucknow-226001 Pan: Aadcd4488R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 25.02.2025, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act For The A.Y. 2017-18 On 19.05.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1 That The Reassessment Proceeding Is Unlawful & Without Jurisdiction As The Approval Has Been Given By Pcit U/S 151(I) Instead Of Pccit U/S 151(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Required U/S 151 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Also Held By The Apex Court In The Case Of Rajeev Bansal. 2. That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Time Barred As Issued Beyond Extended Timeline As Per The Findings Of Apex Court In The Case Of Rajeev Bansal. 3. That The Notice Issued U/S 148 By Jao Is Invalid & Without Jurisdiction As Per The Amended Provision Of Law U/S 151A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Also Making The Reassessment Completed Without Jurisdiction.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

A Kalyanasundaram, Trichy vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Trichy

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

ITA 2408/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2408/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 A Kalyanasundaram The Income Tax Officer Old No.46D, New No.99D Vs. Ward 1(1) Sankar Apartment Trichy. Thiyagarajar Road Trichy – 620 002. [Pan: Btopk8895B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. L Natrajan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Manjunath H.S., Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.07.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.11.2025 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld.Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter

For Appellant: Shri. L Natrajan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Manjunath H.S., Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148A
Section 148A Income Tax Act (2025: s.281) — Case Laws | BharatTax