Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
A reassessment notice issued under section 148 beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required prior approval from the PCCIT under section 151(ii). Approval from the PCIT was insufficient because the controlling date for identifying the competent sanctioning authority is the date of issue of the section 148 notice. Sanction obtained at the section 148A stage could not replace the separate approval required for issuance of the reopening notice. The Tribunal therefore treated the notice as invalid and quashed the consequential reassessment.
A reassessment notice issued under section 148 beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required prior approval from the PCCIT under section 151(ii). Approval from the PCIT was insufficient because the controlling date for identifying the competent sanctioning authority is the date of issue of the section 148 notice. Sanction obtained at the section 148A stage could not replace the separate approval required for issuance of the reopening notice. The Tribunal therefore treated the notice as invalid and quashed the consequential reassessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.