2025 (9) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised in the assessee is that the assessment proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act order dated 26.04.2023 deserves to be quashed as the notice u/s. 148 of the Act is barred by limitation. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the escapement of income is less than Rs. 50.00 lakh and ld. Assessing Officer (AO) was required to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act within three years from the end of the assessment year and the last date to issue such notice was 31.03.2021 whereas notice has been issued to the assessee on 29.07.2022 and therefore such notice is barred by limitation. In support of its contention, reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI Vs.Rajeev Bansal (2024....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....indings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused records. Both the parties have argued only on the Legal Issue. In this case, during the hearing on 08.04.2025, ld.DR sought time to obtain comments from AO and verify the Legal Ground raised by the Assessee. Accordingly, the case was adjourned to 24.04.2025. Today i.e.24.04.2025 we heard the case. The ld.DR filed a report of the Assessing Officer. 4.1 It is an admitted fact that notice u/s. 148 was issued on 18.07.2022 and order u/s. 148A(d) was passed on 18.07.2022.Both these were approved by the ld.Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- 3, Pune vide No.PN/Pr.CIT-3/148/APPROVAL/2022-23/1021 dated 08/07/2022. Section 151 of the Income Tax Act is reproduced h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection 148A(b) of the Act. Various grounds have been raised but one of the primary grounds for challenging the notice under section 148A(d) and the notice under section 148 of the Act both dated 7th April 2022 is that order as well as the notice both mention the authority that has granted approval, is the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax ("PCIT"), Mumbai 5 and the approval has been granted on 7th April 2022. 2. Mr. Gandhi is correct in saying that the Assessment Year ("AY") is 2018-19 and, therefore, since more than three years have expired from the end of the assessment year, Sanctioning Authority under section 151(ii) of the Act should be the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax ("PCCIT") and not the PCIT. Mr. Gandhi sa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anction is invalid and consequently, the impugned order and impugned notice both dated 7th April 2022 under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Act are hereby quashed and set aside."(emphasis supplied) 5.3 The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Agnello Oswin Dias Vs. ACIT [2024] 161 taxmann.com 16 (Bombay) has held as under : "4. The impugned order and the impugned notice both dated 22nd April 2022 state that the Authority that has accorded the sanction is the PCIT, Mumbai-5. The matter pertains to Assessment Year ("AY") 2018-2019 and since the impugned order as well as the notice are issued on 22nd April 2022, both have been issued beyond a period of three years. Therefore, the sanctioning authority has to be th....