ITAT · Kolkata Bench2024§148 · §133(6)
Pradip Chandra Roy · ITAT Kolkata on §148: notice served beyond the statutory time limit is invalid
Is a §148 notice served by affixture after the limitation date valid?
No. A §148 notice served on 28-12-2021 by affixture, beyond the statutory period, is invalid; the reassessment was quashed.
Reviewed by Adidam Sridhar, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Retd.) · Published 2026-07-07
Facts in brief
- The assessee, a retired individual with income below the taxable limit for AY 2014-15, had not filed a return.
- On information about a property transaction in FY 2013-14, the AO issued a §133(6) notice, then a §148 notice dated 31-03-2021 that was served only on 28-12-2021, by affixture.
- The AO added the entire stamp-duty value of the property, Rs. 16,83,600, without verifying records.
Issue before the bench
Whether service of the §148 notice beyond the statutory period sustains the reassessment.
Held
Service by affixture months beyond the statutory window rendered the notice invalid; the reassessment could not survive.
Practitioner takeaway
Always reconstruct the service timeline from the notice date to actual service: limitation is counted to service, not signature.
Where the addition rests on stamp-duty value alone with no record verification, attack both the jurisdiction and the quantum.
More on this topic: Section 148 & 148A: Reassessment case law · Need this drafted? Reassessment & Section 148 Support for CA Firms