Section 156 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.289

Section 156 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 289 (Notice of demand) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 289 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 156 is Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI (73 Taxmann.com 252), cited in 1,778 of the 694 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 156

Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI
73 Taxmann.com 252 · 2016 · High Court
1,778
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E are not applicable for periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the amendment to section 200A inserting clause (c) was effective from that date.

Kourani v. Union OF India
83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court
1,708
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

Fateh Raj Singhvi & Ors. v. UOI
289 CTR 602 · 2016 · High Court
844
citing judgments

A fee under Section 234E cannot be levied or adjusted in an intimation under Section 200A for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the enabling amendment to Section 200A(1)(c) came into effect only from that date.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT
115 TTJ 419 · 2008 · ITAT
292
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

247 ITR 305 (Guj) CIT v. Nestle India Ltd.
140 ITR 832 · 1983 · High Court
172
citing judgments

An employer is not in default under section 201 if they have made a bona fide estimate of employee income and deducted tax at source based on that estimate.

Setty & Others vs. State of Karnataka (7) (1996) 1 SCC 345- Secretary Government of Madras v. P.R. Sriramulu
4 SCC 720 · 2008 · Reported
145
citing judgments

The validity of Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, is examined by the court.

Rajesh Kourani v. Union of India
297 CTR 502 · 2017 · High Court
97
citing judgments

Section 234E creates a substantive liability to pay late fees for failure to deliver statements under section 200(3) within the prescribed time, effective from July 1, 2012, independent of the recovery mechanism under section 200A(1)(c).

Velu Palandar v. DCIT
83 ITR 683 · 1972 · High Court
94
citing judgments

The opportunity of hearing provided to an assessee must be real, effective, and realistic, not merely notional, and tax authorities are incumbent to decide cases on their merits after affording due opportunity.

Judgments on Section 156

Vikas Jain, Kanpur vs. ACIT-CC 2(1)(1), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 434/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 Vikas Jain, Vs. The Acit, H-2/1, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur- Circle 2(1)(1), Kanpur 208001 208006 Pan: Abqpj8049R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 17.05.2024 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer Under Section 147 R.W.S. 143(3) For The A.Y. 2015-16 On 27.12.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because There Being No Reason To Believe, Far From There Being Any Material To Form Reasons To Believe, The Proceedings Initiated Right From Issue Of Notice U/S. 148 & The Re-Assessment Framed Thereof Are All Without Jurisdiction Bad In Law, The Order Passed Be Quashed. 02. Because The So-Called Reasons Having Been Recorded Applying Explanation 2(A) To Section 147, Of The Act Which Not Being Applicable, The Very Reason To Believe Being Contrary To The Mandate Of The Section, The Proceedings- Initiated U/S 148, The Reassessment Framed Are All Contrary To The Provisions Of Law, Be Quashed. 03. Because The Approval Given By The Competent Authority U/S 151, Being Mechanical In Nature Without Verification Of Facts, The Notice Issued U/S 148 & The Reassessment Framed Thereafter Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 156Section 48Section 50C

Mohammed Ayub Mainuddin Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Int Tax Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITITA 2301/MUM/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawalit(It)A No. 2301/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mohammed Ayub Mainuddin Vs Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Shaikh Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai Premier Exotica I, E Wing, 203, Aayakar Bhavan, Premier Road, Off. Lal Bahadur Churchgate, Mumbai Shashtri Marg, Kurla, Mumbai 400002 400070 Pan: (Calps3314L) Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri. Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan, C.A. Respondent By : Shri. Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Final Assessment Order Of Ld. Ito (Intl. Tax) Ward 4(2)(1) Mumbai-3 Vide Order No. Itba/Ast/S/147/2024-25/10701239464(1) Dated 16.12.2024 Passed Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S. 144C(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 06.12.2024, For Ay 2016-17. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: " 1) That The Assessment Order & Demand Order Dated 16Th December 2024 Passed Under Section 147 Read With Section 144C(13) (And R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri. Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)