Reassessment limitation and mandatory prior approval requirements can invalidate reassessment proceedings when statutory conditions are not met.

Reassessment proceedings were held invalid where the notice under Section 148 for A.Y. 2015-16 was issued after the six-year limitation period under Section 149(1), making the proceedings unsustainable and the notice and consequential assessment quashed. For A.Y. 2017-18, the order under Section 148A(d) failed because the requisite prior approval under Section 151(ii) was not obtained from the authority mandated for notices issued beyond three years from the end of the assessment year, creating a jurisdictional defect and leading to quashing of the order and consequential assessment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the reassessment notice for A.Y. 2015-16 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was barred by limitation under Section 149(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (ii) Whether the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2017-18 was invalid for want of proper prior approval under Section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Issue (i): Whether the reassessment notice for A.Y. 2015-16 issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was barred by limitation under Section 149(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The notice dated 30.07.2022 was issued after expiry of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The time limit prescribed by the proviso to Section 149(1) was therefore exceeded, rendering the reassessment proceedings unsustainable.

Conclusion: The reassessment notice and the consequential assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2017-18 was invalid for want of proper prior approval under Section 151(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The notice dated 29.07.2022 was issued beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, so approval had to be obtained from the authority specified in Section 151(ii). The approval recorded was from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak, which did not satisfy the statutory requirement for such a case, resulting in a jurisdictional violation.

Conclusion: The order under Section 148A(d) and the consequential assessment for A.Y. 2017-18 were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Both reassessment proceedings failed on separate statutory grounds, and the connected appeals succeeded in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment proceedings are invalid where the notice is issued beyond the statutory limitation period or where the mandatory prior approval is obtained from an authority not specified by the governing provision.

---