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, for reassessment proceedings relating to Assessment Year 2016-17 initiated under the substituted reassessment regime, prior approval for the order under Section 148A(d) and consequential notice under Section 148 could validly be obtained from the Principal Commissioner, or whether approval from the higher authority specified for cases beyond three years from the end of the assessment year was mandatory.
Analysis: The substituted regime requires prior approval of the specified authority at the relevant stage, and the authority is linked to the elapsed time from the end of the assessment year. Where more than three years have elapsed, approval must be taken from the higher authority contemplated by Section 151(ii). The period of three years from the end of Assessment Year 2016-17 fell within the TOLA window, but the extension operated only up to 30.06.2021. The impugned order dated 30.07.2022 was passed after that period and approval was taken from the Principal Commissioner, who was not the authority prescribed under Section 151(ii).
Conclusion: The approval was invalid, the order under Section 148A(d) and the consequential notice under Section 148 were vitiated, and the proceedings were liable to be quashed.