Section 150 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.283

Section 150 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 283 (Provision for cases where assessment is in pursuance of an order on appeal, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 283 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 150 is 1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co. (53 ITR 231), cited in 158 of the 131 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 150

1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.
53 ITR 231 · 1964 · Supreme Court
158
citing judgments

Income-tax assessment proceedings are administrative in nature, not civil disputes or judicial proceedings between contesting parties. Income-tax authorities act as administrative bodies to estimate income and assess tax, and the proper service of notice within the limitation period is foundational for reassessment jurisdiction.

K.M. Sharma v. ITO
254 ITR 772 · 2002 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

Where the period of limitation for issuing a notice under section 148 has expired before an amendment to the law takes effect, the amended provision, if not expressly retrospective, cannot revive the expired period of limitation to reopen concluded proceedings.

VEERASAMI v. UNION OF INDIA
3 SCC 655 · 1991 · Reported
103
citing judgments

A charge-sheet need not contain a detailed analysis of evidence; the trial court forms its opinion on charges by considering the charge-sheet and all accompanying documents. The case also discusses the constitutional validity of placing the burden of proof on the accused, particularly in anti-corruption cases, in light of Article 21.

ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das
52 ITR 335 · 1964 · Supreme Court
100
citing judgments

The Supreme Court clarified that an appellate authority's 'finding' must be essential for disposing of the appeal for the relevant assessment year, not an incidental observation about another year's income. Appellate authorities cannot issue directions on matters not directly arising in the appeal for the specific assessment year, especially regarding escaped income, which has separate statutory mechanisms.

CIT v. Bhanji Lavji
79 ITR 582 · 1971 · Supreme Court
74
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer when the primary facts necessary for assessment are fully and truly disclosed. The assessee is not obligated to instruct the Income-tax Officer on questions of law, nor can reassessment commence if the AO drew a wrong legal inference from disclosed facts.

CIT v. Satya Narain Patni
46 Taxmann.com 440 · 2014 · High Court
33
citing judgments

Jewellery found in possession, to the extent permitted by Instruction No. 1916 (which exempts up to 100 gms of gold for unmarried male members), cannot be treated as an undisclosed investment.

M B Traders v. ACIT
132 TTJ 490 · 2010 · ITAT
27
citing judgments

Section 148 notices can be issued at any time for assessments or reassessments made in consequence of or to give effect to any final finding, direction, or order of any higher authority.

Pavan Morarka v. ACIT-2
136 Taxmann.com 2 · 2022 · High Court
14
citing judgments

The proposition of law for which this case is cited is not clearly ascertainable from the provided passages, as they only list it as a cited case without detailing the specific legal point decided. However, its prominent placement with sections 147, 148, and 132 suggests it relates to reassessment or search and seizure proceedings.

Shyam Sundar Jindal v. CIT
461 ITR 96 · 2024 · High Court
12
citing judgments

Additions under Section 153A are not justified in the absence of incriminating material found during a search.

Union Public Service Commission And Others v. Angesh Kumar And Others
4 SCC 530 · 1997 · Reported
11
citing judgments

The decision in Union Public Service Commission And Others v. Angesh Kumar And Others is cited for the principle that the interpretation of exemptions under the Right to Information Act, 2005, should consider the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Judgments on Section 150

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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Raja Shelters Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1173/KOL/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.1173 & 1175/Kol/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata.……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Raja Shelters Pvt. Ltd…………………….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 25A, S. P. Mukherjee Road, Kol- 700025. [Pan: Aadcr5073Q] Appearances By: Shri Sanat Kr. Raha, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2009-10 & 2013-14 Against Separate Orders Dated 21.02.2025 & 25.02.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 68