Case Law Details
Arpit Goel Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Appeals filed by the Assessee against different orders of CIT(A)in sustaining the addition made u/s 69A. Assessee submitted that the AO reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 without the approval from the appropriate authority u/s 151 & therefore submits that the consequential reassessments made by issue of notice u/s 148 in the absence of any approval of such reassessments are bad in law & void ab initio.
Tribunal noted that the reasons recorded for initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 issued by the AO for the AYs 2009-10 to 2011-12 were all undated. Further the AO did not mention in the reasons whether he has taken any prior approval for initiating the reassessment proceedings & for issue of notice u/s 148 for these assessment years. assessee also filed under RTI seeking to supply a copy of approval granted by the competent authority for reopening of these assessments.
From perusal of the Order u/s 7(1) of RTI Act Tribunal noticed that the Revenue could not provide any copy of approval as they were not in a possession of the case records. Tribunal observed that since the AO never stated in the reasons recorded whether any approval has been taken by him from the competent authority before issue of notice u/s 148 for reopening of assessments for the AYs 2009-10 to 2011-12 creating a doubt whether at all the AO has obtained any prior mandatory prior u/s 151 more so when the reasons for reopening of assessments were all undated. Revenue also could not provide any copy of approval if any granted for reopening of the assessments. In the absence of any approval u/s 151 from the competent authority for reopening of assessments the assessments made without such approval becomes bad in law & void ab initio . Thus, Tribunal quashed the reassessment orders for assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 as the reassessments were made without the prior approval of the competent authority u/s 151.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
These three appeals are filed by the Assessee against different orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, New Delhi for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 in sustaining the addition made u/s 69A of the Act.
2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment by the Assessing Officer which were placed at page 20B of the Paper Book for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 are undated.
3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the AO reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act without the approval from the appropriate authority u/s 151 of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore submits that since the assessments were reopened without the approval of competent authority u/s 151 of the Act the consequential reassessments made by issue of notice u/s 148 in the absence of any approval of such reassessments are bad in law and void ab initio.
4. On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
5. Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the reasons recorded for initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 issued by the AO for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 were all undated. Further the AO did not mention in the reasons whether he has taken any prior approval for initiating the reassessment proceedings and for issue of notice u/s 148 for these assessment years. We observe that the assessee also filed under RTI seeking to supply a copy of approval granted by the competent authority for reopening of these assessments. The CPIO/ITO, Ward 48(1), New Delhi by order dated 04.07.2023 informed the assessee as under: –
6. From the perusal of the above order, we noticed that the Revenue could not provide any copy of approval as they were not in a possession of the case records. We observed that since the AO never stated in the reasons recorded whether any approval has been taken by him from the competent authority before issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act for reopening of assessments for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 creating a doubt whether at all the AO has obtained any prior mandatory prior u/s 151 of the Act more so when the reasons for reopening of assessments were all undated. The Revenue also could not provide any copy of approval if any granted for reopening of the assessments. In the absence of any approval u/s 151 from the competent authority for reopening of assessments the assessments made without such approval becomes bad in law and void ab initio . Thus, we quash the reassessment orders for assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 as the reassessments were made without the prior approval of the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act.
7. Since we have quashed the reassessments for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 on a legal issue. We are not inclined to go into the merits of the addition/disallowance made by the AO in the assessment orders for all these years as it would be of only academic in nature at this stage and the same are left open.
8. In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as indicated above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.06.2025
Author Bio
