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

JCIT(in Situ) CC22 Kolkata, Kolkata vs. Global Casting Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITSSA 41/KOL/2025[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Sonjoy Sarmait(Ss)A No.41/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Jcit (In Situ), Cc-2(2), Kolkata Vs Global Casting Private Limited Swastick Building, 1, Sardar Sankar Road, Kolkata-700026 Pan No.Aaccg 9845 L (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.L.Poddar, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manjunatha G, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-26, Dated 16.12.2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-2013. 2. At The Outset, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Delayed By 27 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay. Looking To The Facts & Circumstances Of Case & Considering The Sufficient Reasons Stated By The Revenue In Its Affidavit, We Condone The Delay Of 27 Days In Filing The Present Appeal & The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made U/S. 68 Of The Act On Account Of Bogus Share Capital/Premium Amounting To Rs.3,14,99,865/-

For Appellant: Shri S.L.Poddar, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68