TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1947
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder framed u/s 147 / 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2019 on the ground that the notice u/s 148 of the Act on 26.03.2019 was issued even before the mandatory approval of the sanctioning authority was received i.e. PCIT-4, Kolkata, approval u/s 151 of the Act. "IV. The impugned reassessment order dated 28th December, 2019 passed 143(3) read with section 147 the Act in the case of assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is without jurisdiction, illegal invalid and bad in law. The reassessment proceedings were wrongly initiated vide notice dated 26.03.2019 under section 148, even prior to receipt of the proforma/ form containing the mandatory approval of the sanctioning authority, i.e., the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT)-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. AO was also affirmed by the ld. CIT (A). 04. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued by the ld. AO on 26.03.2019, whereas the approval was communicated to the ld. AO, the ACIT, Circle 10(2), Kolkata by ITO Ward 10(4), Kolkata for PCIT-4, Kolkata vide letter dated 28.03.2019. For the sake of ready reference the same is extracted below: - "No. Pr. CIT-4/Kol/148/2018-19/13414 Dated 28.03.2019 To The DCIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Sir, Sub: Approval for reopening of proceedings u/s. 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the case of M/s. Paras Plaza Pvt. Limited.; PAN AAECP8301N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Act is invalid as the same was issued even prior to the communication of approval u/s 151 of the Act to the ld. AO thereby rendering all the consequential proceedings including the assessment framed to be nullity and invalid in the eyes of law. Therefore, we are inclined to quash the reopening of assessment and the consequent order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sethi Auto Service Station and Anr. Vs. Delhi Development Authority and Ors. 2008 (10) TMI 659 (SC), wherein the Supreme Court has held as under: - "12. It is trite to state that notings in a departmental file do not have the sanction of law to be an effective or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....possible, observed the Court, that after expressing one [1962] Supp 3 SCR 713 opinion about a particular matter at a particular stage a Minister or the Council of Ministers may express quite a different opinion which may be opposed to the earlier opinion. In such cases, which of the two opinions can be regarded as the "order" of the State Government? It was held that opinion becomes a decision of the Government only when it is communicated to the person concerned. 14. To the like effect are the observations of this Court in Laxminarayan R. Bhattad & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.^4, wherein it was said that a right created under an order of a statutory authority must be communicated to the person concerned so as to confer an ....