Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.282

Section 149(1)(b) falls under section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 282 (Time limit for notices under sections 280 and 281) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 282 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 149(1)(b) is 535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI (385 ITR 497), cited in 163 of the 329 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 149(1)(b)

535 (Del); 6. Tata Teleservices v. UOI
385 ITR 497 · 2016 · High Court
163
citing judgments

Orders passed under section 201(1) are barred by limitation if the prescribed period of limitation under section 201(3) had expired before the amendment by the Finance Act, 2014 came into force. The amended section 201(3) does not apply retrospectively.

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Price Waterhouse
3 SCC 722 · 2002 · Reported
58
citing judgments
B.K Gooyee v. CIT
62 ITR 109 · 1966 · High Court
26
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, that is not signed by the Income Tax Officer is invalid and considered no notice at all, as the signature is an essential and integral part of the notice.

P. Satyanarayana Chetty v. Income Tax Officer
101 ITR 385 · 1975 · High Court
25
citing judgments

Sanction for reassessment proceedings under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act must be granted with due application of mind and cannot be a mechanical or routine exercise.

Dattatraya Gopal Bhotte v. CIT
150 ITR 460 · 1984 · High Court
23
citing judgments

Central Board of Revenue (now CBDT) circulars that confer a benefit on the assessee are binding on income-tax officers and must be followed, even if they deviate from the strict interpretation of the law.

CIT v. Micro Labs Ltd.
348 ITR 75 · 2012 · High Court
21
citing judgments

The notice issued under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is invalid if no search warrant was issued in the name of the assessee. A notice under section 153C can only be assumed by the AO if incriminating material relevant to the assessee was found during a search and seizure operation in another case and there was no search warrant in the assessee's name.

Mayawati v. CIT
321 ITR 349 · 2010 · High Court
20
citing judgments

Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, only mandates the issuance of a notice within the prescribed period and does not require the notice to be served on the assessee within that same period.

Cit v. Independent Mdia (P) Ltd.
210 Taxmann 14 · 2012 · High Court
19
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer (AO) is not required to prove that share money originated from the assessee's own funds; Section 68 of the Income Tax Act does not place such a burden on the AO.

Vikram Bhatnagar v. ACIT
147 Taxmann.com 254 · 2023 · High Court
16
citing judgments

An assessment order passed against a deceased person, even if initiated after death, is null and void and must be set aside, especially when the return was filed by the legal representative.

Renu T Tharani v. DCIT (International Taxation)
117 Taxmann.com 84 · 2020 · Reported
15
citing judgments

The case is distinguished when the assessee has explained the contents of a base note and clarified their residency status and taxability in India, unlike in the cited case where the assessee, a non-resident, failed to explain the contents of a base note related to a foreign bank deposit.

Judgments on Section 149(1)(b)

Shri P. Divagar, Pondicherry vs. ITO, Ward-4, Pondicherry

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2885/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2885/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri P. Divagar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.3, 1St Cross, Saranarayanan Ward 4, Nagar, Reddiyarpalayam, Pondicherry. Pondicherry 605 010. [Pan: Asgpd8572Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Puducherry, Dated 20.08.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals) Dismissing The Appeal On The Issue Of Jurisdiction & On The Merits Is Contrary To Law, Erroneous & Unsustainable On The Facts Of The Case. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Reopening By Issue Of Notice U/S.148 & The Completion Of Assessment U/S.147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 3Section 54F

Ashok Leyland Finance Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1013/CHNY/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1013/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2002-03 M/S. Ashok Leyland Finance Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of [Now Indusind Bank Ltd.], Vs. Income Tax, Company Circle 1(1), No. 115/116, G.N. Chetty Road, 121 Mahathma Gandhi Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaaca4656P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai Dated 20.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2002-03. The First Ground Challenged By The Assessee Is With Regard To Confirmation Of Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] & The Second Ground Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of ₹.2,34,03,271/- Under 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. S. Vijayaprabha, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 251Section 263Section 43B