Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/reassessment-quashed-sanction-incompetent-authority.html
Suresh Kumar Giddaluru Vs Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (ITAT Surat)
Reassessment Quashed for Invalid Sanction: Approval by PCIT Instead of Competent Authority Renders Notice Void
The Surat Bench of the ITAT allowed the assessee’s appeal for AY 2018-19 by quashing the reassessment proceedings on a pure jurisdictional defect. The Tribunal held that since the notice under section 148 was issued on 05.04.2022—after expiry of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year—the mandatory sanction under section 151 was required to be granted by the Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner (or equivalent higher authority). In the present case, the approval had been accorded by the Principal Commissioner, which was admittedly not the competent authority under law.
As the statutory precondition for valid assumption of jurisdiction was not satisfied, the notice issued under section 148 was held to be vitiated and the entire reassessment proceedings were declared null and void. In view of this jurisdictional infirmity, the Tribunal allowed the appeal without going into the merits of additions relating to short-term capital gains, commission income based on Form 26AS, or penalty proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT SURAT
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 10.07.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year 2018-19.
2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment u/s.147 of the act and issuing notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject. the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.78,91,200/- on account of computing short term capital gain by valuing 10 percent of the estimated cost of acquisition.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 10,07,553/- on account of alleged commission and brokerage income treated as business income on the basis of Form-26AS statement.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 270A(10) of the Income.
5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has not offered adequate opportunities to hear the case and passed ex-parte order, hence the case may please be set aside and restored back to the CIT(A) or AO for sake of interest of natural justice.”
3. The present appeal is pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018-19. The notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued on 05.04.2022. As per the provisions of section 151 of the Act, the sanction for issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act has to be granted by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General if more than 3 years have elapsed from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. Since the approval has been given by the Principal Commissioner in this case, and this fact has not been disputed by the Revenue, we hold that notice issued by the Revenue is vitiated, and hence the subsequent proceedings are hereby treated as null and void.
4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
This order is pronounced in the open Court on 23.01.2026
aniltikotekar4sme.com 