Section 151 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.284

Section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 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 is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 of the 4,323 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 151

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court
1,589
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO
259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court
1,349
citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das
103 ITR 437 · 1976 · Supreme Court
721
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

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. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

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.

Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.
387 ITR 529 · 2016 · High Court
670
citing judgments

Assessments under Section 153A cannot be sustained without any incriminating material found during the search that substantiates the additions. This principle applies even to completed assessments where no additional income is disclosed.

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.

Judgments on Section 151

M/S. Kuber Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward- 2(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1371/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.1371/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 M/S Kuber Tie-Up Pvt. Ltd……………....................…...……………....Appellant 16, Gandhi House, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, 8Th Floor, Kolkata-13. [Pan: Aacck6127H] Vs. Acit(Osd), Ward-2(3), Kolkata.………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sanket Joshi, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 30, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.05.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 142 Days. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) Was Not Physically Served Upon The Assessee. The Order Was Sent On Email, However, The Said Email Was Not Noticed By The Assessee, Therefore, The Assessee Did Not Come To The Knowledge Of The Passing Of The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A). The Passing Of The Order Of The Cit(A) Came To The Knowledge Of The Assessee Only On October 2023. Thereafter, The Assessee Regularly Approached His Consultant To File The Appeal, However, The Consultant Was Busy In Return Filing Activity & Did Not File The Appeal. Thereafter, The Assessee

Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 250

Friends Telecom Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyafriends Telecom Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Pvt. Shop No.4, Ground Floor, Central Circle 2, Plot No.19, Veer Savarkar Block, Delhi. Shakarpur, East Delhi, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaccf0776H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 25.07.2024 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-23, New Delhi Dated 29.09.2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Notice U/S 148 Issued In This Case Is Bad-In- Law, Illegal, Without Jurisdiction & Barred By Limitation And, Therefore, The Said Notice U/S 148 Along With Assessment Order Passed On The Foundation Of Such Notice Are Liable To Be Quashed & Cit(A) Erred In Not Holding So. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Are Contrary To The Provisions Of Law Including The Specific Provisions Of Section 147 To Section 151 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Therefore, The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated Along With Assessment Order

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Gracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1883/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyagracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Pvt. Shop No.4, Ground Floor, Central Circle 2, Plot No.19, Veer Savarkar Block, Delhi. Shakarpur, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaccd5744M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 25.07.2024 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-23, New Delhi Dated 29.09.2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Notice U/S 148 Issued In This Case Is Bad-In- Law, Illegal, Without Jurisdiction & Barred By Limitation And, Therefore, The Said Notice U/S 148 Along With Assessment Order Passed On The Foundation Of Such Notice Are Liable To Be Quashed & Cit(A) Erred In Not Holding So. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Are Contrary To The Provisions Of Law Including The Specific Provisions Of Section 147 To Section 151 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Therefore, The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated Along With Assessment Order

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Gracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1882/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyagracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Pvt. Shop No.4, Ground Floor, Central Circle 2, Plot No.19, Veer Savarkar Block, Delhi. Shakarpur, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Aaccd5744M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 Date Of Order : 25.07.2024 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-23, New Delhi Dated 29.09.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Notice U/S 148 Issued In This Case Is Bad-In- Law, Illegal, Without Jurisdiction & Barred By Limitation And, Therefore, The Said Notice U/S 148 Along With Assessment Order Passed On The Foundation Of Such Notice Are Liable To Be Quashed & Cit(A) Erred In Not Holding So. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Reassessment Proceedings Initiated Are Contrary To The Provisions Of Law Including The Specific Provisions Of Section 147 To Section 151 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 & Therefore, The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated Along With Assessment Order

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68