Section 148B of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 148B is 1. Malabar Industrial Company Ltd. v. CIT (332 ITR 231), cited in 23 of the 193 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 148B

1. Malabar Industrial Company Ltd. v. CIT
332 ITR 231 · 2011 · High Court
23
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer's order is not erroneous, in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, solely because the Principal Commissioner disagrees with the AO's conscious decision made after due verification.

6. C. S. Atwal v. CIT Ludhiana & Another
59 Taxmann.com 359 · 2015 · High Court
17
citing judgments

Capital gains are taxable only when there is a transfer of property, and not merely on the execution of an agreement for sale. The registration of an agreement for sale is crucial for determining the nature and taxability of the transaction.

Tiru S. Shyam Kumar v. ACIT
99 Taxmann.com 39 · 2018 · High Court
17
citing judgments
KAD Housing Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (
469 ITR 32 · 2024 · High Court
15
citing judgments

Assessments reopened under Section 147/148 based on information found during a search under Section 153A/153C require compliance with the conditions laid out in Section 149, as interpreted in relation to the law prior to the Finance Act, 2021.

ACIT v. Ms. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte
87 Taxmann.com 116 · 2017 · ITAT
13
citing judgments

Loose papers without independent corroboration are considered 'dumb documents' and cannot be used as the sole basis for an income tax addition.

Trib.). 12) Utility Supply (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
174 Taxmann.com 250 · 2025 · Reported
11
citing judgments

Mechanical approval of a draft assessment order by a superior authority renders the assessment order void ab initio, as it indicates a lack of proper application of mind.

TR 83 (Del.), Bimal Kumar Anant Kumar Vs. CIT (2007) 159 TAXMAN 402 (All.), Salem Steel Co. v. CIT
377 ITR 158 · 2015 · High Court
11
citing judgments
Trustees Anupam Charitable Trust (1987) 167 ITR (129) (Rajasthan), CIT v. Godawari Sugar Mills Ltd.
160 CTR 107 · 2000 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad v. Anupam Kapoor
166 Taxmann 178 · 2008 · Reported
5
citing judgments
Homelife Buildcon (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
176 Taxmann.com 614 · 2025 · Reported
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 148B

Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs. ITO Ward 1, Junagadh

In the result, both appeals (ITA No

ITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 836 & 837/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21 ] Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Ito Ward 1, Junagadh, Nandanvan Patel Chowk, Junagadh, बनाम/ Dargahvali Sheri Manavadar Gujarat 362001 Vs. Junagadh, Gujarat-362630 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Acbpm4826B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2019-20 & 2020-21, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 24.09.2025 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148BSection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A

Shri Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Junagadh

In the result, both appeals (ITA No

ITA 836/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 836 & 837/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21 ] Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Ito Ward 1, Junagadh, Nandanvan Patel Chowk, Junagadh, बनाम/ Dargahvali Sheri Manavadar Gujarat 362001 Vs. Junagadh, Gujarat-362630 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Acbpm4826B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2026 :: आदेश/Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2019-20 & 2020-21, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 24.09.2025 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148BSection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A