My 148A(b) notice describes an enquiry but nothing was attached. Can I insist on the material?
Yes. The Jharkhand High Court held the Department is duty-bound and mandatorily required to supply all material information, the enquiry conducted and the supporting documents along with the s.148A(b) notice; a three-page narration with no enclosures does not discharge that obligation.
Decided by the High Court (Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, Division Bench — Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan) on 2023-09-12, reported as [2023] 156 taxmann.com 273 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 296 Taxman 16 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 464 ITR 748 (Jharkhand); 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 74; W.P.(T) No. 2042 of 2023. It bears on section 148A, section 148, section 147, section 12A of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Reassessment & Reopening matters.
A Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, binding in Jharkhand, which turns the usual request for relied-upon documents from a plea for administrative grace into a statutory requirement of s.148A(b). The reasoning is that the hearing s.148A gives is real only if the assessee knows the case it has to meet, and it cannot test or contradict what it has not been shown. In Jharkhand, therefore, a notice with no enclosures is not sustainable as it stands.
Binding within that High Court's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
The petitioner is a charitable-cum-religious trust, incorporated under s.8 of the Companies Act 2013 and registered under s.12A of the Income-tax Act. Acting on information on the Department's Insight Portal, the Assessing Officer took the view that the trust was engaged in real estate activities and issued a notice under s.148A(b) on 3 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20. The enquiry into the transactions came afterwards, not before: the proposal for an enquiry under s.148A(a) was uploaded to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Patna, on 3 March 2023 and approved, a letter went to the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Ranchi, on 14 March 2023 seeking further details of the trust's dealings in immovable property, and that officer proposed reopening on 15 March 2023. The order under s.148A(d) and the notice under s.148 both followed on 22 March 2023. The order rested in part on a new item on the Insight Portal, that the trust had sold residential property worth Rs. 51,70,125 on 15 June 2018, which had not existed when the notice issued and was never put to the trust. Neither the enquiry report nor the Insight Portal material nor the information gathered from the investigation wing was supplied; some of it appeared for the first time in the Department's counter affidavit in the writ proceedings.
The order under s.148A(d) dated 22 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20 and the notice under s.148 of the same date were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to supply all the relied-upon documents on the basis of which the s.148A(b) notice had been issued and to pass an order strictly in accordance with the section and with the Board's circular; the writ application was allowed (paras 15 and 16). The proposition is narrower than it is often stated. Conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b); but if the Department does conduct an enquiry, then it is mandatory to provide the report of that enquiry along with the notice under s.148A(b) (para 7). The Court also held that the notice here had been issued in haste and without any enquiry, the enquiry following the notice, and that an order under s.148A(d) cannot rest on material that surfaced after the notice and was never shown to the assessee (paras 8 and 11).
The Court began from the purpose of the 2021 reassessment scheme — ease of doing business, fewer reopened cases and less litigation — and then stated the rule at para 7 in two limbs: an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b), but where one is conducted its report must go with the notice. On the facts the enquiry post-dated the notice, so the notice had been issued in haste and without enquiry, and the trust never had the chance to answer the enquiry's findings before the s.148A(d) order or the s.148 notice (para 8). The Department's counter affidavit denied that any enquiry had been made from a third party, but its own impugned order showed one had been and no report of it was given (para 9). The essence of s.148A(b) is opportunity, and withholding the information and supporting documents frustrated that purpose and prevented the trust from putting its explanation; some of the material was disclosed for the first time in the counter affidavit and had not even been relied on in the impugned order (para 10). The s.148A(d) order also rested on a new item from the Insight Portal that post-dated the notice and was never provided (para 11). The Court then read the Board's circular of 1 August 2022, whose template notice at Annexure A1 directs the Assessing Officer to enclose copies of all relevant information relied on with supporting documents and to allow the assessee 7 to 30 days to reply (para 12). It followed Best Buildwell (P.) Ltd. v. ITO and Anurag Gupta v. ITO (para 13), and distinguished the Allahabad decision the Revenue relied on, Deepak Kumar Yadav v. Pr. CIT, because the question there was whether the correctness of the information could be tested in the reassessment, whereas here the supporting documents had simply never been supplied (para 14).
though conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent for issuance of notice u/s 148A(b) of the I.T Act, 1961; however, if the respondent department conducts an enquiry; then, it is mandatory for the respondent department to provide the report of the enquiry along with the Notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the I.T Act, 1961.
Upload it and we will read it, work out your deadline and draft the reply. A CA reviews before anything is filed.
Handle my notice → Ask a CA on WhatsAppYes. The Jharkhand High Court held the Department is duty-bound and mandatorily required to supply all material information, the enquiry conducted and the supporting documents along with the s.148A(b) notice; a three-page narration with no enclosures does not discharge that obligation. This was decided by the High Court (Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, Division Bench — Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan) and bears on section 148A, section 148, section 147, section 12A of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as [2023] 156 taxmann.com 273 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 296 Taxman 16 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 464 ITR 748 (Jharkhand); 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 74; W.P.(T) No. 2042 of 2023. A Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, binding in Jharkhand, which turns the usual request for relied-upon documents from a plea for administrative grace into a statutory requirement of s.148A(b). The reasoning is that the hearing s.148A gives is real only if the assessee knows the case it has to meet, and it cannot test or contradict what it has not been shown. In Jharkhand, therefore, a notice with no enclosures is not sustainable as it stands. If it applies to you, the first step is this: Ask in writing for the relied-upon material and the enquiry documents before filing the substantive reply, and keep the request on record.
The petitioner is a charitable-cum-religious trust, incorporated under s.8 of the Companies Act 2013 and registered under s.12A of the Income-tax Act. Acting on information on the Department's Insight Portal, the Assessing Officer took the view that the trust was engaged in real estate activities and issued a notice under s.148A(b) on 3 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20. The enquiry into the transactions came afterwards, not before: the proposal for an enquiry under s.148A(a) was uploaded to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Patna, on 3 March 2023 and approved, a letter went to the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Ranchi, on 14 March 2023 seeking further details of the trust's dealings in immovable property, and that officer proposed reopening on 15 March 2023. The order under s.148A(d) and the notice under s.148 both followed on 22 March 2023. The order rested in part on a new item on the Insight Portal, that the trust had sold residential property worth Rs. 51,70,125 on 15 June 2018, which had not existed when the notice issued and was never put to the trust. Neither the enquiry report nor the Insight Portal material nor the information gathered from the investigation wing was supplied; some of it appeared for the first time in the Department's counter affidavit in the writ proceedings. The matter was decided on 2023-09-12 by the High Court (Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, Division Bench — Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan). On those facts the High Court held as follows. The order under s.148A(d) dated 22 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20 and the notice under s.148 of the same date were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to supply all the relied-upon documents on the basis of which the s.148A(b) notice had been issued and to pass an order strictly in accordance with the section and with the Board's circular; the writ application was allowed (paras 15 and 16). The proposition is narrower than it is often stated. Conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b); but if the Department does conduct an enquiry, then it is mandatory to provide the report of that enquiry along with the notice under s.148A(b) (para 7). The Court also held that the notice here had been issued in haste and without any enquiry, the enquiry following the notice, and that an order under s.148A(d) cannot rest on material that surfaced after the notice and was never shown to the assessee (paras 8 and 11).
The Court began from the purpose of the 2021 reassessment scheme — ease of doing business, fewer reopened cases and less litigation — and then stated the rule at para 7 in two limbs: an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b), but where one is conducted its report must go with the notice. On the facts the enquiry post-dated the notice, so the notice had been issued in haste and without enquiry, and the trust never had the chance to answer the enquiry's findings before the s.148A(d) order or the s.148 notice (para 8). The Department's counter affidavit denied that any enquiry had been made from a third party, but its own impugned order showed one had been and no report of it was given (para 9). The essence of s.148A(b) is opportunity, and withholding the information and supporting documents frustrated that purpose and prevented the trust from putting its explanation; some of the material was disclosed for the first time in the counter affidavit and had not even been relied on in the impugned order (para 10). The s.148A(d) order also rested on a new item from the Insight Portal that post-dated the notice and was never provided (para 11). The Court then read the Board's circular of 1 August 2022, whose template notice at Annexure A1 directs the Assessing Officer to enclose copies of all relevant information relied on with supporting documents and to allow the assessee 7 to 30 days to reply (para 12). It followed Best Buildwell (P.) Ltd. v. ITO and Anurag Gupta v. ITO (para 13), and distinguished the Allahabad decision the Revenue relied on, Deepak Kumar Yadav v. Pr. CIT, because the question there was whether the correctness of the information could be tested in the reassessment, whereas here the supporting documents had simply never been supplied (para 14). In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "though conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent for issuance of notice u/s 148A(b) of the I.T Act, 1961; however, if the respondent department conducts an enquiry; then, it is mandatory for the respondent department to provide the report of the enquiry along with the Notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the I.T Act, 1961." The decision followed or applied Best Buildwell (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2022] 141 taxmann.com 558 / 288 Taxman 670 / 447 ITR 26 (Delhi); Anurag Gupta v. ITO [2023] 150 taxmann.com 99 / 454 ITR 326 (Bom.); Distinguished: Deepak Kumar Yadav v. Pr. CIT [2023] 151 taxmann.com 376 / 293 Taxman 694 (All.); CBDT Circular for issuance of notice under section 148 dated 1 August 2022.
It was decided by the High Court on 2023-09-12 and is reported as [2023] 156 taxmann.com 273 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 296 Taxman 16 (Jharkhand) / [2024] 464 ITR 748 (Jharkhand); 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 74; W.P.(T) No. 2042 of 2023. Binding within that High Court's jurisdiction. Persuasive elsewhere. A High Court decision binds the assessing officer, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal within that state, and is persuasive elsewhere. If your assessment is in a different jurisdiction, check whether your own High Court has taken the same view before relying on it. On section 148A, section 148, section 147, section 12A, the practical question is whether the facts of your own notice match the facts of this case closely enough for the same rule to apply.
It helps the taxpayer. The order under s.148A(d) dated 22 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20 and the notice under s.148 of the same date were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to supply all the relied-upon documents on the basis of which the s.148A(b) notice had been issued and to pass an order strictly in accordance with the section and with the Board's circular; the writ application was allowed (paras 15 and 16). The proposition is narrower than it is often stated. Conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b); but if the Department does conduct an enquiry, then it is mandatory to provide the report of that enquiry along with the notice under s.148A(b) (para 7). The Court also held that the notice here had been issued in haste and without any enquiry, the enquiry following the notice, and that an order under s.148A(d) cannot rest on material that surfaced after the notice and was never shown to the assessee (paras 8 and 11). It arises in Reassessment & Reopening matters, on section 148A, section 148, section 147, section 12A of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi, Division Bench — Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Justice Deepak Roshan. Before relying on it, read the source linked on this page and check whether it has since been distinguished, overruled or overtaken by an amendment to the Income Tax Act. In practice the steps that follow from it are these. State expressly that you cannot answer allegations whose underlying material you have not seen - that is the ground the Court accepted. Reserve the right to file a further reply once the documents are supplied. Frame the objection as non-compliance with the s.148A procedure rather than opening on the merits of the alleged escapement.
Validity check could not be completed. No later decision applying, following or affirming this judgment was traced, and the report carries no citator banner, so nothing is known of any special leave petition. It has been cited twice. In Sevensea Vincom (P.) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT [2024] 159 taxmann.com 500 (Jharkhand), 11 December 2023, counsel for the assessee relied on it before the same Bench, but that case turned on the limitation in s.149 and the judgment records no decision followed. In Agarwal Polysacks Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-I [2024] 166 taxmann.com 248 (Rajasthan), 18 July 2024, the Rajasthan High Court expressly distinguished it on the facts at para 10, on the footing that here the Revenue had started gathering information and supporting documents only after issuing the notice under s.148A(b), and decided against the assessee. So the decision has been confined rather than approved, and absence of contrary authority is not later approval. No source could be cited for that finding. Checking whether an authority still stands matters as much as knowing what it held: a decision may be overruled on one point and survive on another, or the provision it interprets may have been amended since. Read the source and the editor's note on this page before relying on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal.
Three corrections that change how this case should be cited. The date is 12 September 2023, not 31 October 2023, and the citations are [2023] 156 taxmann.com 273, [2024] 296 Taxman 16 and [2024] 464 ITR 748; the cause title as reported is Chotanagpur Diocesson Trust Asson., so search on that spelling. The year is assessment year 2019-20. And the holding has two limbs, not one: at para 7 the Court said that conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b), but that if the Department does conduct an enquiry it is mandatory to supply the report with the notice. Quoting only the second limb turns a conditional duty into a general one, and a coordinate High Court has already used that difference against an assessee — in Agarwal Polysacks Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-I [2024] 166 taxmann.com 248 (Rajasthan), 18 July 2024, this decision was distinguished at para 10 and the writ petition failed. What was decisive here was the sequence: the notice under s.148A(b) issued on 3 March 2023, the enquiry followed, and the order under s.148A(d) of 22 March 2023 relied in part on an Insight Portal entry about a property sale that post-dated the notice and was never put to the trust. The Court also relied on the Board's circular of 1 August 2022, whose template notice requires copies of all relevant information relied on to be enclosed. The relief was both: the s.148A(d) order and the s.148 notice were quashed and set aside, and the matter remitted to supply the documents and decide again. The report carries no citator banner, so any special leave petition against this decision is unknown, and no later decision applying it was traced. The judgment does not decide whether a fresh order made after the remand would be within time, and it does not consider the trust's substantive answer to the allegation that it was engaged in real estate activity; that is left to the fresh proceedings. The cause title is spelt Chotanagpur Diocesson Trust Asson. in the report and Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Association elsewhere, so search on both. This library shows the verification state of every entry openly. This entry has not yet been read in full by a chartered accountant. The summary reflects the sources listed on this page. Read the source before you rely on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The order under s.148A(d) dated 22 March 2023 for assessment year 2019-20 and the notice under s.148 of the same date were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to supply all the relied-upon documents on the basis of which the s.148A(b) notice had been issued and to pass an order strictly in accordance with the section and with the Board's circular; the writ application was allowed (paras 15 and 16). The proposition is narrower than it is often stated. Conducting an enquiry is not a condition precedent to a notice under s.148A(b); but if the Department does conduct an enquiry, then it is mandatory to provide the report of that enquiry along with the notice under s.148A(b) (para 7). The Court also held that the notice here had been issued in haste and without any enquiry, the enquiry following the notice, and that an order under s.148A(d) cannot rest on material that surfaced after the notice and was never shown to the assessee (paras 8 and 11).
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
We charge fees for our public utility work. Does that cost us charitable status under s.2(15)?
My return was only processed under 143(1). Does that stop the department reopening it later?
Our trust was formed weeks ago and has done nothing yet. Can registration be refused for that?
How much am I actually required to disclose — and can they reopen because the officer drew the wrong conclusion?