https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794733 Reopening beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required approval from the specified authority under section 151(ii). Approval granted by the Principal Commissioner, instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority, was held invalid. On that basis, the notice under section 148, the section 148A(d) order, and the consequential reassessment proceedings were quashed, and the reassessment was annulled for want of valid sanction. The Tribunal treated the remaining grounds as academic because the defect in jurisdictional approval was outcome-determinative. en-us Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2026 07:39:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794733 Reopening beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required approval from the specified authority under section 151(ii). Approval granted by the Principal Commissioner, instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner or equivalent authority, was held invalid. On that basis, the notice under section 148, the section 148A(d) order, and the consequential reassessment proceedings were quashed, and the reassessment was annulled for want of valid sanction. The Tribunal treated the remaining grounds as academic because the defect in jurisdictional approval was outcome-determinative. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794733