Invalid reassessment approval by the wrong authority vitiates a delayed notice and makes the reassessment void ab initio.

Reassessment notice issued beyond three years from the end of the assessment year required prior approval from the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority under section 151(1)(ii). Approval granted only by the Principal Commissioner did not satisfy the statutory safeguard and therefore was invalid. The defective approval went to the root of jurisdiction, rendering the section 148 notice bad in law and the consequential reassessment order void ab initio.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment notice issued beyond three years from the end of the assessment year was vitiated because the approval under section 151(1)(ii) was granted by the Principal Commissioner instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority, and whether the consequential reassessment could survive.

Analysis: The notice under section 148 was issued for assessment year 2017-18 after the expiry of three years from the end of the assessment year. In such a situation, the statutory safeguard under section 151(1)(ii) required approval from the Principal Chief Commissioner or the equivalent higher authority. The approval in the present case was accorded by the Principal Commissioner only. Following the binding view applied by the Tribunal, such approval was not in conformity with the statutory mandate and therefore went to the root of the assumption of jurisdiction for reassessment.

Conclusion: The approval was invalid, the notice under section 148 was bad in law, and the consequential reassessment order was void ab initio.

Ratio Decidendi: Where reassessment is initiated after the prescribed period and the statute requires approval of a specified higher authority, approval by a lower or different authority vitiates the reassessment for want of valid jurisdiction.

---