Facts of the Case
The petitions before the Delhi High Court involved
reassessment proceedings relating to Assessment
Years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The petitioners had filed their income tax
returns, which were processed by the Income Tax Department under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act.
Following the Supreme Court decision in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal, the
Revenue issued notices under Section
148A(b) alleging that certain income had escaped assessment.
After receiving replies from the assessees, the
Assessing Officer passed orders under Section
148A(d) and issued reassessment notices under Section 148 of the Act.
The petitioners challenged these notices before the
High Court on the ground that the reassessment proceedings were initiated without obtaining approval from the
“specified authority” as required under Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
Issues Involved
- Whether reassessment notices issued under Sections 148 and 148A(d) without approval from the specified authority under Section
151(ii) are legally valid.
- Whether approval from a lower authority instead of the statutorily
prescribed authority can sustain reassessment proceedings.
- Whether reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to the decision
in Union of India v. Ashish
Agarwal can bypass the statutory requirement of approval.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated after more than three years from the end of
the relevant assessment year, and therefore approval was required
from the authority specified under
Section 151(ii).
- However, approval was obtained from authorities mentioned in Section 151(i) instead of the
competent authority prescribed under Section 151(ii).
- The first proviso to Section
148 clearly mandates that no
notice shall be issued unless prior approval of the specified authority is
obtained.
- Therefore, the impugned notices and orders were issued without jurisdiction and were
liable to be quashed.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated in accordance with the
framework laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal.
- Reliance was placed on the Taxation
and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020
(TOLA) and CBDT Instruction
No.1/2022 dated 11.05.2022.
- The Revenue also suggested that approval of the specified authority
was not mandatory in the manner
claimed by the petitioners.
- Alternatively, the Revenue sought liberty to initiate reassessment
proceedings afresh if the Court set aside the impugned notices.
Court Findings
- The first proviso to
Section 148 clearly mandates that a notice for reassessment can
only be issued after obtaining prior
approval of the specified authority.
- Section 151 specifies which authority is competent to grant such
approval depending on the time elapsed from the relevant assessment year.
- If more than three years
have elapsed, approval must be obtained from authorities specified
under Section 151(ii) such
as the Principal Chief
Commissioner or Principal Director General.
- In the present batch of cases, although more than three years had
elapsed, approval was obtained from authorities falling under Section 151(i), which was not
legally permissible.
- Therefore, the reassessment notices and orders were legally unsustainable.
Court Order
- Quashed the impugned notices issued under
Section 148 and the orders passed under Section 148A(d) in all the writ petitions.
- Held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to absence of approval from the specified
authority under Section 151(ii).
- Granted liberty to the
Revenue to initiate reassessment proceedings afresh in accordance with law.
Important Clarification by the Court
- Approval of the specified authority is a mandatory statutory requirement under the Income Tax Act.
- The rank of the approving
authority depends on the time limit prescribed in Section 149,
which is linked with Section 151.
- Failure to obtain approval from the correct authority renders reassessment proceedings invalid in law.
Link to download the order
- https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS05012024CW165242022_114311.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment