TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1799
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2023) 1 SCC 617. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the said notice and the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto on the basis that the notice is invalid as it was not issued with the prior approval of the authorities specified under Section 151 (ii) of the Act. 4. Briefly stated the facts as necessary to address the aforesaid controversy are as under: 5. The petitioner [Assessee] is a subsidiary company of a Swedish company, M/s H&M GDC and is engaged in the business of retail trading of clothing merchandise. The Assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18, declaring total income of Rs. 22,11,39,360/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) was issued on 27.09.2018. Subsequently, notice under Section 142 (1) was issued along with questionnaire on 10.05.2019. The assessment order dated 24.12.2019, was passed under Section 143 (3) assessing the total income of the Assessee at Rs. 46,44,78,060/-. It was also directed that applicable interest under Section 234B, 234C & 234D be charged accordingly; the demand notice and challan are also to be issued; and penalty proceedings under Section 270A be initiated separat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 35,53,51,229/- has escaped assessment for the AY 2017-18. The petitioner responded to the said notice on 08.06.2022. 9. By the letter dated 08.06.2022, the Assessee stated that the reassessment proceedings initiated are bad in law as no new material is available to initiate such proceedings and that in-depth analysis of the same has already been done proceedings under Section 143 (3), OCM (Operation Clean Money)/demonetization proceedings etc. Therefore, the re-assessment proceedings initiated is void ab initio as the notice is issued is invalid. 10. The learned AO was not persuaded with the explanation provided by the Assessee and passed an order dated 30.07.2022 under Section 148A (d) of the Act, holding that it was a fit case for reopening the assessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act. 11. The AO issued a notice dated 30.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Act accompanied with the order dated 30.07.2022 passed under Section 148A (d) of the Act. 12. It is apparent from the said notice that it was not issued with the prior approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT) or any other authority specified under Section 151 (ii) of the Act. Such....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....read TOLA as intending to amend the distribution of power or the categorisation envisaged and prescribed by Section 151. The additional time that the said statute provided to an authority cannot possibly be construed as altering or modifying the hierarchy or the structure set up by Section 151 of the Act. The issue of approval would still be liable to be answered based on whether the reassessment was commenced after or within a period of four years from the end of the relevant AY or as per the amended regime dependent upon whether action was being proposed within three years of the end of the relevant AY or thereafter. The bifurcation of those powers would continue unaltered and unaffected by TOLA. 39. The fallacy of the submission addressed by the respondents becomes even more evident when we weigh in consideration the fact that even if the reassessment action were initiated, as per the extended TOLA timelines, and thus after the period of four years, Section 151 incorporated adequate measures to deal with such a contingency and in unambiguous terms identified the authority which was to be moved for the purposes of sanction and approval. Section 151 distributed the powers of ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner or Principal Director General or, where there is no Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General, Chief Commissioner or Director General. 12.2. That the approval is mandatory is plainly evident on perusal of the first proviso appended to section 148 of the Act. The said proviso, at the risk of repetition, reads as follows: "Provided that no notice under this section shall be issued unless there is information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year and the Assessing Officer has obtained prior approval of the specified authority to issue such notice." 12.3. In these cases, there is no dispute that although three (3) years had elapsed from of the end of the relevant AY, the approval was sought from authorities specified in clause (i), as against clause (ii) of Section 151." 12.4. Before us, the counsel for the Revenue continue to hold this position. The only liberty that they seek is that if, based on the judgment in Ganesh Dass Khanna [Ganesh Dass Khanna v. ITO, (2024) 460 ITR 546 (Delhi); 2023 SCC OnLine Del 7286; 2023: DHC:8....