https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462940 The ITAT Pune held that since more than three years had elapsed from the end of the assessment year, the competent authority to approve the notice under section 148 and order under section 148A(d) was the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The notice and order in the case were approved by the Principal Commissioner, which was not competent. Consequently, the notice under section 148 and the order under section 148A(d) were quashed, ruling in favor of the assessee. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 20:29:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462940 The ITAT Pune held that since more than three years had elapsed from the end of the assessment year, the competent authority to approve the notice under section 148 and order under section 148A(d) was the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. The notice and order in the case were approved by the Principal Commissioner, which was not competent. Consequently, the notice under section 148 and the order under section 148A(d) were quashed, ruling in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462940