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

Patil Ranajagjitsingh Padmasinha, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the quantum appeals of the assessee being ITA

ITA 4192/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 4189/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 2. Ita No. 4190/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 4191/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) 4. Ita No. 4192/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Patil Ranajagjitsingh Ito Padmasinha Huf It-Office, Vashi 101 Sagar Ratan, Indl Vs. Railway Station Premise, D-265 Midc Building, Navi Ttc, Ind Area, Mumbai-400 705 Turbhe, Navi Mumbai- 400 705 Pan/Gir No. Aabhp5884Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal & Shri Suhas Kulkarni, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shree Kumar C., Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] For Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016- 17. Since Common Facts & Interconnected Issues Are Involved, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Details Of Appeals Are As Under:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Patil Ranajagjitsingh Padmasinha, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the quantum appeals of the assessee being ITA

ITA 4191/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 4189/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 2. Ita No. 4190/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 4191/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) 4. Ita No. 4192/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Patil Ranajagjitsingh Ito Padmasinha Huf It-Office, Vashi 101 Sagar Ratan, Indl Vs. Railway Station Premise, D-265 Midc Building, Navi Ttc, Ind Area, Mumbai-400 705 Turbhe, Navi Mumbai- 400 705 Pan/Gir No. Aabhp5884Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal & Shri Suhas Kulkarni, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shree Kumar C., Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] For Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016- 17. Since Common Facts & Interconnected Issues Are Involved, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Details Of Appeals Are As Under:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Patil Ranajagjitsingh Padmasinha, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the quantum appeals of the assessee being ITA

ITA 4190/MUM/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 4189/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 2. Ita No. 4190/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 4191/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) 4. Ita No. 4192/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Patil Ranajagjitsingh Ito Padmasinha Huf It-Office, Vashi 101 Sagar Ratan, Indl Vs. Railway Station Premise, D-265 Midc Building, Navi Ttc, Ind Area, Mumbai-400 705 Turbhe, Navi Mumbai- 400 705 Pan/Gir No. Aabhp5884Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal & Shri Suhas Kulkarni, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shree Kumar C., Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] For Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016- 17. Since Common Facts & Interconnected Issues Are Involved, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Details Of Appeals Are As Under:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Patil Ranajagjitsingh Padmasinha HUF, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the quantum appeals of the assessee being ITA

ITA 4189/MUM/2026[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 4189/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 2. Ita No. 4190/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 4191/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) 4. Ita No. 4192/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Patil Ranajagjitsingh Ito Padmasinha Huf It-Office, Vashi 101 Sagar Ratan, Indl Vs. Railway Station Premise, D-265 Midc Building, Navi Ttc, Ind Area, Mumbai-400 705 Turbhe, Navi Mumbai- 400 705 Pan/Gir No. Aabhp5884Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal & Shri Suhas Kulkarni, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shree Kumar C., Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.06.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Arise Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] For Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2016- 17. Since Common Facts & Interconnected Issues Are Involved, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Details Of Appeals Are As Under:

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Abc Connects, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee are allowed

ITA 44/CHNY/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Honourable Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 44/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2014-15 Abc Connects, V. The Income Tax Officer, No.27/33, Thendral Nagar, Ward-1, Near Annai Sathya Nagar, Erode. Palayapala, Erode Collectorate S.O, Erode, Tamil Nadu-638 011. [Pan: Aaofa1397A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode), Ld. Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.Guru Prasad, Addl. Cit, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) / Nfac, (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’) Dated 12.11.2025, For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred As The ‘Ay’) 2014-15. Grounds Of Appeal 1) The Impugned Order Is Unjust, Unreasonable & Bad In Law. 2) The Learned First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Considering The Scope & Effect Of The First Proviso To Sec. 147, As Nothing Discernible From The Assessment Order As To The Proviso Mentioned Above. 3) The Learned First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Considering The Reasons Recorded & The Corresponding Satisfaction Of The Revenue, Which Speak Volumes About The Fact That The Above Proviso Was Not Followed At All.

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Mr.Guru Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151(1)