Jurisdictional defect in reassessment sanction invalidated reopening where approval under section 151 was not obtained as mandated

Reassessment reopening beyond the prescribed period must be sanctioned by the authority specified in section 151, and that jurisdictional safeguard cannot be diluted by obtaining approvals from multiple authorities not contemplated by the statute. Here, the recorded sanction was taken from both the Joint/Additional Commissioner and the Principal Commissioner instead of the statutorily prescribed authority alone. Because the approval process did not comply with the mandated legal scheme, the reopening suffered from a foundational jurisdictional defect and the reassessment proceedings were invalid and quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment proceedings were vitiated because approval under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was obtained from both the Joint/Additional Commissioner and the Principal Commissioner, instead of the statutorily prescribed authority.

Analysis: For reopening beyond the prescribed period, the statute requires sanction by the authority specified in section 151. The recorded approval showed that the Assessing Officer obtained satisfaction from both the Joint/Additional Commissioner and the Principal Commissioner. The statutory scheme does not permit a jurisdictional safeguard meant for a designated authority to be diluted by obtaining multiple approvals in a manner not contemplated by the provision. Since the sanction was not granted in the manner mandated by law, the reopening suffered from a foundational jurisdictional defect.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were invalid and were quashed.

---