Section 149 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.282

Section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (469 ITR 46), cited in 713 of the 1,766 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 149

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. RRJ Securities Ltd.
380 ITR 612 · 2016 · High Court
689
citing judgments

Completed assessments can be interfered with under Section 153A or 153C only on the basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search, necessitating a direct correlation between the discovered material and the power to assess or reopen concluded assessments.

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.

SSP Aviation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
346 ITR 177 · 2012 · High Court
308
citing judgments

The date of initiation of search or requisition for the purpose of abatement of assessment proceedings is the date of search or requisition, or the date of receipt of seized documents by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, whichever is later. Proceedings under section 153C can only be initiated by the Assessing Officer of the searched person after being satisfied that seized documents belong to another person.

ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
394 ITR 569 · 2017 · High Court
282
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and specifically relate to the assessment years for which assessments are reopened. A document relevant only for one year cannot be used to reopen other assessment years without being incriminating for those years.

PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd.
465 ITR 101 · 2024 · High Court
277
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, the commencement point for calculating the six or ten assessment year block period is the date of issuing the Section 153C notice, or the date of the satisfaction note/handing over of books, as clarified by the first proviso to Section 153C(1).

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
378 ITR 84 · 2015 · High Court
254
citing judgments
K.P.Madhusudhanan v. CIT
251 ITR 99 · 2001 · Supreme Court
199
citing judgments

Voluntary disclosures or explanations offered by an assessee do not automatically absolve them from penalty under section 271(1)(c) if the explanation is not substantiated by credible evidence.

CIT (Central) v. Kabul Chawla
2015 SCC OnLine DEL 11555 · 2015 · Reported
186
citing judgments

No addition can be made in respect of a completed assessment in the absence of incriminating material, especially when considering the object and purpose of Section 153-A.

Pr. CIT v. Index Securities (P.) Ltd.
86 Taxmann.com 84 · 2017 · High Court
184
citing judgments

For a valid reassessment under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and directly relevant to the assessment years being reopened. Documents that are not incriminating or do not relate to the assessment years do not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement.

Judgments on Section 149

Aanya Realtors, Mumbai vs. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department / Income Tax Officer Ward -34(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3636/MUM/2026[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Aanya Realtors Assessment Unit Income Tax A-52, Dakshina Park, N S Department / Income Tax Road No. 10, Juhu Scheme, Officer, Ward -34(1)(1), Vs. Mumbai - 400049 Mumbai (Pan: Aatfa0781B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Neelam Jadhav, Advocate Revenue : Smt. Sujatha Iyyanger, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1084607226(1) Dated 09.01.2026, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Assessment Unit, U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B & Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 09.05.2023, For Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2.1. Assessee Vide Ground No.1 Before Us, Challenges The Impugned Reassessment Proceedings, Contesting That It Is Barred By The Limitation In View Of The Decision Of Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Union Of 2 Aanya Realtors Ay 2015-16 India Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 Taxmann.Com 70 (Sc). Since The Said Ground Of Appeal Goes To The Roots Of The Matter Being Jurisdictional Issue, The Same Is Taken Up For Adjudication. Merits Of The Case Have Not Been Argued Upon By Either Party Nor Any Submission Made To That Effect. Accordingly, We Draw Facts From The Records Relating To Said Legal Ground, Argued Before The Bench.

For Appellant: Ms. Neelam Jadhav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sujatha Iyyanger, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 3Section 3(1)Section 69A

Vinodray Nagjibhai Thacker, Bhuj vs. ITO, Ward-4, Gdham(Bhuj-2)/, Bhuj

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 195/RJT/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Jul 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 194 & 195/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18 ] Vinodray Nagjibhai Thacker, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4, Vs. 12 Zulelal Society, Near Court Gandhidham (Bhuj-2), Bhuj, Bldg, Bhuj, Gujarat-370001 Gujarat-370001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abhpt2539H (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/07/2026 : आदेश /Order : Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2016-17 & 2017-18, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 15.03.2024 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 (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act Dated 28.03.2022 & 29.03.2022, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

Vinodray Nagjibhai Thacker, Bhuj vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4, Gandhidham (Bhuj - 2), Bhuj

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 194/RJT/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Jul 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 194 & 195/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18 ] Vinodray Nagjibhai Thacker, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4, Vs. 12 Zulelal Society, Near Court Gandhidham (Bhuj-2), Bhuj, Bldg, Bhuj, Gujarat-370001 Gujarat-370001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abhpt2539H (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03/07/2026 : आदेश /Order : Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2016-17 & 2017-18, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 15.03.2024 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 (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act Dated 28.03.2022 & 29.03.2022, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69