Reopening beyond three years requires approval from the proper section 151 authority; defective sanction vitiates reassessment jurisdiction.

A notice under section 148 issued after three years from the end of assessment year 2017-18 required approval from the authority prescribed under section 151 for the extended reopening period. As approval was obtained only from the Principal Commissioner and not from the Principal Chief Commissioner, the statutory condition for valid reopening was not met. The defect was treated as jurisdictional and went to the root of the reassessment, rendering the proceedings invalid and the notice liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after the expiry of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, was invalid for want of approval from the proper authority under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The assessment year involved was 2017-18 and the notice under section 148 was issued beyond three years from the end of that year. In such a case, the approval required for reopening had to be obtained from the authority prescribed by section 151 for the extended time period. Since approval was taken only from the Principal Commissioner and not from the Principal Chief Commissioner, the reopening did not satisfy the statutory requirement. Following the binding jurisdictional precedent, the defect went to the root of jurisdiction and vitiated the reassessment proceedings.

Conclusion: The notice under section 148 was invalid and liable to be quashed, and the assessee succeeded on the jurisdictional challenge.

---