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

DCIT Central Circle Gzbd, Hapur vs. Mirha Exports Private Ltd., Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed and both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1234/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 873/Del/2022 2012-13 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt.Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 2. 655/Del/2022 2012-13 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit (Assessee’S Appeal) Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Ghaziabad Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 3. 1233/Del/2022 2013-14 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 4. 656/Del/2022 2013-14 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit (Assessee’S Appeal) Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle Ghaziabad 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 5. 1234/Del/2022 2015-16 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 6. 657/Del/2022 2015-16 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Ghaziabad Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. 7. 874/Del/2022 2016-17 Dcit (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 8. 658/Del/2022 2016-17 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee’S Appeal) Central Circle Ghaziabad 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. 9. 875/Del/2022 2017-18 Dcit (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250

DCIT Central Circle Gzbd, Hapur vs. Mirha Exports Private Ltd., Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed and both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1233/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalsl. Ita No(S) Asst. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 873/Del/2022 2012-13 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt.Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 2. 655/Del/2022 2012-13 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit (Assessee’S Appeal) Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Ghaziabad Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 3. 1233/Del/2022 2013-14 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 4. 656/Del/2022 2013-14 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit (Assessee’S Appeal) Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle Ghaziabad 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 5. 1234/Del/2022 2015-16 Dcit M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 6. 657/Del/2022 2015-16 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Ghaziabad Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. 7. 874/Del/2022 2016-17 Dcit (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P 8. 658/Del/2022 2016-17 M/S. Mirha Exports Dcit Pvt. Ltd. (Assessee’S Appeal) Central Circle Ghaziabad 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P M/S. Mirha Exports Pvt. Ltd. 9. 875/Del/2022 2017-18 Dcit (Revenue’S Appeal) Central Circle 30, Bazar Lane, Bengali Ghaziabad Market, Central Delhi-110001 Pan-Aaacm8612P

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 250

Pradeep Janardhan Sakhare, Sambhajinagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(A), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2509/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2509/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pradeep Janardhan Sakhare, Ito, Ward – 1(1), Ashay Regency, Flat No. 9, Aurangabad New Vishal Nagar, Chh. Sambhajinagar, Vs. Maharashtra-431001 Pan : Bobps8283M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi (Virtual) Department By : Smt. Indira R. Adakil Date Of Hearing : 04-12-2025 Date Of 18-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.09.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2018-19. 2. Briefly Stated The Facts Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. For Ay 2018-19, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Income Of Rs.3,17,830/-. Based On The Information Received From The Insight Portal Under „High Risk Criu/Vru Information‟, It Was Found That The Assessee Has Done Transaction In Crypto Currency Of Rs.38,54,500/-, The Source Of Which Requires Verification & Also There Were Unexplained Credit Entries Aggregating To Rs.40,44,044/-. As The Assessee Failed To Disclose The Above Transaction In The Itr Filed For The Ay 2018-19, The Ld. Assessing Officer (“Ao”) Had Reason To Believe That The Above Income In Ay 2018-19 Has Escaped Assessment. Accordingly, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) Dated 07.04.2022. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 09.06.2023. Statutory Notice(S) U/S 142(1) & 144 Were Then Issued To The Assessee. As The Assessee Failed To File Any Compliance

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. Rathi (Virtual)For Respondent: Smt. Indira R. Adakil
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 69ASection 69B

Shivi Mukesh Kumar, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 5293/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Jagadishshivi Mukesh Kumar Acit, Circle 22(1) D-1402, Hubtown Seasons, Mumbai Next To Fine Arts Society, Vs. Ramakrishna Chemburkar Marg, Chembur, Mumbai-400 071 Pan/Gir No. Aqapk 9881 H (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Dharan V. Gandhi – Advocate & Ms. Vinita A. Nara – Advocate Respondent By : Shri Arun Kanti Datta – Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 01.07.2025, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short), Delhi, Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. 2. Though, The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, However, At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Counsel Appearing For The Assessee Specifically Drew Our Attention To Ground No. 6, Which Reads As Under: 6. The Sanction U/S. 151 Is Bad In Law & As A Result, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Bad In Law. 3. Referring To This Ground, Ld. Counsel Submitted, At The Very Outset, This Issue May Be Considered And, If Warranted The Other Issues Can Be Taken Up Thereafter. As Could Be Seen

For Appellant: Shri Dharan V. Gandhi – Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta – CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 35(1)(ii)