Section 151(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.284

Section 151(1) falls under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 284 (Sanction for issue of notice) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 284 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 151(1) is Gurpal Singh v. ITO (159 ITD 797), cited in 58 of the 102 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 151(1)

Gurpal Singh v. ITO
159 ITD 797 · 2016 · ITAT
58
citing judgments

Mere cash deposits in a bank account, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind on reasons to believe, are not sufficient grounds to invoke jurisdiction under Section 147 for reassessment proceedings.

Voltas Ltd. v. ACIT
349 ITR 656 · 2012 · High Court
25
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 is time-barred and deserves to be quashed if no allegation is made against the assessee for failure to disclose material facts, and the AO's assertion of no prior assessment is contrary to the record. The jurisdiction assumed under section 147 is without lawful basis in such circumstances.

Ashish Plastic Industries v. ACIT
373 ITR 451 · Reported
14
citing judgments

An assessee must be allowed credit for income surrendered and disclosed in another year or by another group assessee to avoid impermissible double taxation.

Dhadda Exports v. ITO
58 Taxmann.com 176 · 2015 · High Court
10
citing judgments

Sanction for issuing a notice under Section 148 is required under Section 151(1). A notice issued without valid sanction is void ab initio and the reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed.

91 (Guj), (iv) CIT v. Apex Therm Packaging (P.) Ltd.
71 Taxmann.com 275 · 2016 · High Court
9
citing judgments
Assessment. Ingram Micro (India) Exports (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
78 Taxmann.com 140 · 2017 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Hindutan Lever Ltd. v. R. B. Wadkar, ACIT
269 ITR 186 · 2004 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Sidhmicro Equities (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
150 Taxmann.com 460 · 2023 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Foramer v. CIT
119 Taxmann 61 · 2001 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Balakrishna Hiralal Wani v. ITO
403 ITR 196 · 2018 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 151(1)

Shri P. Divagar, Pondicherry vs. ITO, Ward-4, Pondicherry

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2885/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2885/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri P. Divagar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.3, 1St Cross, Saranarayanan Ward 4, Nagar, Reddiyarpalayam, Pondicherry. Pondicherry 605 010. [Pan: Asgpd8572Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Puducherry, Dated 20.08.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals) Dismissing The Appeal On The Issue Of Jurisdiction & On The Merits Is Contrary To Law, Erroneous & Unsustainable On The Facts Of The Case. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Reopening By Issue Of Notice U/S.148 & The Completion Of Assessment U/S.147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 3Section 54F

M/S. Translands Infrastructure Developers P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-15(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1676/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1676/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Translands Infrastructure बिधम/ Dcit-15(3)(1) Developers Pvt. Ltd. Room No.451, Aayakar Vs. Office No. A-702, 7Th Floor, Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Everest Nivara Infotech Park, Mumbai-400020. Plot No.D/3, Ttc Industrial Area, Midc, Turbhe, Navi Mumbai-400705. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadct0036B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. P. Bairagra Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 25.02.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -24, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act. A.Y.2012-13 2. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Reassessment U/S 147 Which Was Reopened By Ao On The Basis Of Borrowed Satisfaction I.E. Merely On The Basis Of Information Received In Letter From Dy. Dit (Inv.) In Respect Of Search & Seizure U/S 132 Of The Act In The Case Of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt Without Application Of His Own Mind Before Issue Of Notice U/S 148. 3. The Ld Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Reassessment U/S 147 Reopened By Ao Without Taking The Requisite Approval From The Principal Commissioner U/S 151(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Recording The Satisfaction That It Is A Fit Case For Reopening On The Basis Of Reasons For Reopening Recorded By The Ld Ao As No Exact Copy Of The Said Approval Has Been Given To The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri J. P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 68