Petition Against IT Act Reassessment Dismissed; Appeal Allowed Without Limitation Objections for Factual and Legal Grounds.

The HC dismissed the petition challenging the reassessment proceedings under Sec. 147 of the IT Act, 1961, and the notice under Sec. 148, citing the issuance of a final assessment order. The court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal against the reassessment order within 30 days, free from limitation objections, enabling the petitioner to raise both factual and legal grounds.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 and notice under Section 148 on grounds of legality and jurisdiction due to mechanical sanction under Section 151.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 and the notice issued under Section 148, alleging that the proceedings were illegal and lacked jurisdiction due to a mechanical grant of sanction under Section 151. The petitioner sought to prevent respondent No. 4 from passing the final order until the petition's disposal.

2. The petitioner, an income tax assessee, filed returns for the assessment year 2015-16, declaring total income and claiming exemption under Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains. Respondent No. 4 issued a notice under Section 148, prompting the petitioner to request reasons recorded and approval under Section 151. Despite objections, respondent No. 4 proceeded with the reassessment.

3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the reassessment was based on information from DDIT (Inv.), Delhi, contrary to Section 147. He contended that no inquiry under Section 131 or 133(6) was conducted, and the lack of provided sanction under Section 151 invalidated the proceedings. Reference was made to various judgments supporting these contentions.

4. Respondents' counsel countered, stating that all mandatory conditions were met in issuing the notice under Section 148. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur approved the reassessment, following standard procedures outlined by the CBDT. A final assessment order was passed, rendering the petition non-maintainable with an available remedy under Section 246A.

5. The court heard arguments from both sides and examined the documents presented.

6. The petitioner's counsel highlighted irregularities in the notice under Section 148, citing legal precedents. Respondents' counsel affirmed compliance with the law and noted the final assessment order's issuance during the petition's pendency, suggesting an appeal as an alternative remedy.

7. Reference was made to a judgment by the Hon'ble Division Bench regarding the need to raise appeals against reassessment orders instead of pursuing writ petitions post-assessment order issuance.

8. Given the final assessment order's issuance, the court, in line with the Division Bench's judgment, dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal within 30 days without limitation objections.

9. The petition was dismissed, granting the petitioner the right to appeal against the reassessment order within 30 days, with freedom to raise factual and legal grounds without limitation objections.

10. The petition was ultimately dismissed with the aforementioned liberty for appeal.

---