TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Reopening Assessment Beyond Three Years Requires PCCIT Sanction Under Section 151(ii), Invalid Without It</h1> <h3>KPMG LLP Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle 2 (1) (2), Delhi & Ors.</h3> KPMG LLP Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle 2 (1) (2), Delhi & Ors. - 2024:BHC - OS:2911 - DB The petition challenges notices dated 27th March 2022 (under Section 148A(b)) and 21st April 2022 (under Sections 148A(d) and 148) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to Assessment Year 2018-19. A key issue is the validity of the sanction for issuing the order and notice, which was granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) rather than the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT). Since both the order and notice were issued beyond the three-year period, Section 151(ii) mandates that the sanctioning authority must be the PCCIT. The proviso to Section 151, allowing PCIT sanction in certain cases, was effective only from 1st April 2023 and is thus inapplicable here. Relying on the precedent in Siemens Financial Services Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [(2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom)], the Court held the sanction invalid. Consequently, the impugned order and notice dated 21st April 2022 are quashed and set aside. The petition is disposed of with no order as to costs, keeping all rights and contentions open.
TaxTMI 