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)

Amit Pahuja, Indore vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 868/MUM/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeamit Pahuja Vs Dcit, Circle-1, Thane 6 Roopam Nagar, Near Manik Office Of Dcit, Ashar It Park, 6Th Bagh Over Bridge, Indore, Floor, Road No.16Z, Wagle Madhya Pradesh-452013 Industrial Estate, Thane-400604 Pan: Atspp4469M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Jaideep Jain Adv. & Shri Ashish Goyal Adv. (Virtually Appeared) Revenue By : Shri Mukesh Thakwani (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2026 O R D E R Per:Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [For Brevity The “Ld. Cit(A)”], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2019-20, Date Of Order 16.01.2026. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Assessment Unit Income Tax Department (For Brevity The ‘Ld. Ao’) Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Date Of Order 13.01.2025. 2 Amit Pahuja 2. The Assessee Has Taken The Additional Grounds Which Are As Below: “The Following May Kindly Be Admitted As Additional Grounds: - 3. That, The Proceeding Initiated By Ld.Ao U/S 148 Are Illegal, Invalid, Without Jurisdiction, Void-Ab-Initio, Non Est, Barred By Limitation. 4. That, The Reopening Of Assessment Beyond Three Years Is Bad In Law, As The Conditions Prescribed Under Section 149(1)(B) Have Not Been Satisfied. 5. That, The Approval Was Taken From Pr. Cit Instead Of Pr. Ccit/Ccit As Mandated Under Section 151 In Case Notice U/S 148 Issued Beyond 3 Years.”

For Appellant: Shri Jaideep Jain Adv. & Shri Ashish Goyal Adv. (Virtually appeared)For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani (Sr.DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 80G