Jurisdictional defect in reassessment sanction invalidates reopening when approval comes from an incompetent authority.

A jurisdictional objection to reopening can be raised at a later appellate stage even if it was not pressed before the first appellate authority, because a defect affecting jurisdiction cannot be waived or cured by consent, acquiescence or abandonment. The reopening was also held invalid because the order under section 148A(d) and the consequential notice under section 148 were issued after three years from the end of the assessment year, requiring approval of the higher specified authority under section 151(ii). Approval by the Principal Commissioner was insufficient, so the sanction was not valid and the reassessment proceedings were void ab initio.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a jurisdictional objection to reopening could be entertained despite the assessee not pressing it before the first appellate authority; (ii) whether the reassessment proceedings were invalid for want of approval from the correct specified authority under section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Issue (i): Whether a jurisdictional objection to reopening could be entertained despite the assessee not pressing it before the first appellate authority.

Analysis: A defect going to jurisdiction strikes at the root of the proceedings and cannot be cured by consent, waiver, acquiescence, or abandonment of a ground before an earlier appellate authority. Where the objection concerns the very authority to initiate reassessment, it remains open to be raised at a later appellate stage on the basis of the existing record.

Conclusion: The jurisdictional objection was rightly entertained and was not barred by the earlier non-pressing of the ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the reassessment proceedings were invalid for want of approval from the correct specified authority under section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: For the relevant assessment year, the order under section 148A(d) and the consequential notice under section 148 were issued after the expiry of three years from the end of the assessment year. In such a case, the statute required approval of the higher specified authority under section 151(ii), and approval by the Principal Commissioner was insufficient. Since valid sanction from the prescribed authority is a condition precedent for assumption of jurisdiction to reopen, non-compliance vitiates the proceedings.

Conclusion: The reassessment was invalid and the notice and consequential proceedings were void ab initio.

Final Conclusion: The jurisdictional challenge succeeded, the reassessment proceedings were quashed, and the revenue's appeal ceased to survive on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: A reopening of assessment is void where the sanction for issuance of notice is obtained from an authority not competent under the applicable clause of section 151, and such a jurisdictional defect may be raised notwithstanding an earlier waiver or non-pressing of the ground.

---