Manju Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Quashes Reassessment: Approval from PCIT Instead of PCCIT Proves Fatal
The Delhi ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that a notice issued under Section 148 after the expiry of three years is invalid if the mandatory approval prescribed under Section 151 is not obtained from the correct authority.
In the case, the original notice under the old reassessment regime was issued beyond the three-year period. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated under the new regime through Sections 148A(b) and 148A(d), followed by a fresh notice under Section 148. However, the Assessing Officer had obtained approval from the PCIT instead of the PCCIT, even though the case fell within the category where approval from the PCCIT was statutorily required.
The Tribunal observed that obtaining sanction from the wrong authority is not a mere procedural irregularity but goes to the root of jurisdiction. Since the mandatory requirement of Section 151 was not complied with, the notice itself was held to be invalid, rendering the entire reassessment proceedings unsustainable.
Accordingly, the reassessment was quashed in toto and the assessee’s appeal was allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [in short ‘CIT(A)’] dated 25.2.2026, for assessment year 2017-18.
