Facts of the Case
Multiple writ petitions were filed before the Delhi
High Court challenging reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax
Department for Assessment Years 2016-17
and 2017-18.
The reassessment process was initiated through
notices issued under Section 148A(b)
of the Income Tax Act after the judgment in Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617.
After considering replies submitted by the
assessees, the Assessing Officer passed orders under Section 148A(d) holding that certain income had allegedly escaped
assessment and consequently issued notices under Section 148 for reassessment.
The petitioners approached the High Court
contending that the reassessment notices and orders were invalid because the mandatory approval of the
“specified authority” was not obtained as required under Section 151(ii) of the
Income Tax Act.
Issues Involved
- Whether reassessment notices issued under
Sections 148A(d) and 148 are valid without obtaining approval from the
“specified authority” as prescribed under Section 151 of the Income Tax
Act.
- Whether approval obtained from an
authority not specified under Section 151(ii) is sufficient for initiating
reassessment proceedings where more than three years have elapsed from the
relevant assessment year.
- Whether reassessment proceedings
initiated without proper statutory approval are liable to be quashed.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated without obtaining approval from the competent specified authority
under Section 151(ii).
- Under the amended provisions introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, approval of
the specified authority is a mandatory
statutory requirement before issuing notice under Section 148.
- Since more than three years
had elapsed from the relevant assessment year, approval was
required from authorities mentioned in Section 151(ii) such as the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, but the
department obtained approval from authorities mentioned under Section 151(i).
- Therefore, the entire reassessment proceedings were without jurisdiction and liable to be
set aside.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The reassessment proceedings were initiated in accordance with the
provisions of the Income Tax Act and the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain
Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA).
- The Department also relied on CBDT Instruction No. 1/2022 dated 11.05.2022 to justify the
issuance of reassessment notices.
- The Revenue submitted that approval of the specified authority
should not invalidate the proceedings if approval had been granted by
another competent authority.
Court Findings
- The first proviso to
Section 148 clearly requires the Assessing Officer to obtain prior approval from the specified
authority before issuing reassessment notices.
- Section 151 of the Income
Tax Act specifically identifies the authority whose approval is required
depending on the time elapsed since the relevant assessment year.
- Where more than three years
have elapsed, approval must be obtained from the authorities
specified in Section 151(ii).
- In the present cases, the approval had been taken from authorities
mentioned in Section 151(i)
instead of those prescribed in Section
151(ii).
Court Order
- Quashed the impugned orders under Section
148A(d) and the consequential notices issued under Section 148.
- 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 fresh reassessment proceedings in accordance with law,
if permissible.
Important Clarification
- Approval of the correct
“specified authority” under Section 151 is mandatory.
- Issuance of reassessment notices without obtaining such approval renders the proceedings legally
unsustainable.
- The ruling also highlights the interlinkage between limitation under Section 149 and the authority granting approval under Section 151.
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