2021 (7) TMI 698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... present appeal. 3. With consent of learned counsel for the appellant, the present appeals are taken up for hearing. 4. It is pertinent to mention that the present appeals have been filed challenging the common order dated 21st December, 2018 passed by ITAT in ITA Nos. 3879/Del/2015, ITA No.3877/Del/2015, ITA No.3880/Del/2015 and ITA No.3878/Del/2015. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow:- "16. We 1st deal with the appeal of the assessee with respect to the sanction granted by the learned CIT under section 151 of the income tax act. According to the provisions of section 151 which provides as under: "151. Sanction for issue of notice.- (1) In a case where an assessment under sub-sectio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., need not issue such notice himself." 17. The relevant extracts of the various assessment year about the assessment are as under:- Sr. A.Y. Returned Income Assessed Income Assessed Under section Date of Issue of Notice Sanction obtained by Reference of sanction mentioned by AO Sanction should have been obtained by 1 2004-05 450313 450313 143 (1) 25/8/10 CIT Para No.2.4 of the order Joint CIT 2 2005-06 855600 855600 143 (1) 25/8/10 CIT Para No.2.4 of the order Joint CIT 3 2006-07 945320 945320 143 (1) 25/8/10 CIT Para No.2.4 of the order Joint CIT 4 2007-08 747140 747140 143 (1) 25/8....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 292B based upon the decision in S.P.L's Siddhartha Ltd (supra), which rejected the revenue's contention about its application holding that where a jurisdictional infirmity strikes at the root, invalidating the issuance of notice, Section 292B cannot rescue it. 8. The Revenue's argument seems plausible and even logical because the Commissioner or a Chief Commissioner is unarguably ranked higher in authority than a Joint Commissioner. Yet at the same time, this Court has to give effect to plain words of the statute which unambiguously states that the competent authority in such cases is the Joint Commissioner (and not the Chief Commissioner or the Principal Commissioner). The Revenue's submissions that all such cases....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee on the ground of incorrect sanction obtained by the learned assessing officer holding that the order passed by the learned assessing officer for all these 4 years are not sustainable in law, consequently the appeals of the learned assessing officer are also not sustainable. In view of this, all these 4 appeals of the learned assessing officer are dismissed. 21. Accordingly, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the learned AO are dismissed." 5. In the appeals, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has prayed for framing of the following common substantial questions of law:- "A. Whether the Hon'ble High Court is justified in law in quashing the notice issued u/s 148 on the ground that the satis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and not by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. It was not urged before the statutory Authorities below that no sanction was required in the present cases as the initial assessments had been completed under Section 143(1) of the Act and the notices for Re-assessments under Section 148 had been issued within four years period. In fact, even in the appeals filed before us, the following grounds have been agitated by the appellant:- A. Because the Ld. IT AT has failed to consider the specific facts of the assessment year involved in the present appeal. The Ld. IT AT ought to have considered that in this case, assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act and four years have not expired from the end of the relevant assessment year....