Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the sanction for issuing the notice under section 148 and passing the order under section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was valid when accorded by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax for assessment year 2017-18.
Analysis: The reassessment proceedings related to a notice and order dated July 20, 2022 for assessment year 2017-18, i.e. beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. In that situation, the sanctioning authority had to be the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax under section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proviso to section 151, inserted with effect from April 1, 2023, was held inapplicable. Since the sanction was admittedly granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, the statutory requirement was not satisfied.
Conclusion: The sanction was invalid, and the notice under section 148 and the order under section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were quashed and set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: For reassessment proceedings initiated beyond three years, sanction must be accorded by the authority prescribed under section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sanction by a different authority is invalid and vitiates the notice and consequent order.