Kiran Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi Quashes Reassessment– Wrong Authority’s Approval Invalidates 148 Notice- Rs.2.25 Cr LTCG Addition Deleted as 148 Notice Found Invalid
Assessee filed appeal against order of CIT(A) which had upheld reassessment framed u/s 147/144B. There was a delay of 11 days in filing appeal, explained as order was served only on old email ID of disengaged counsel. Tribunal condoned the delay, holding that it was bona fide.
The case originated from notice u/s 148 issued on 30.07.2022 after order u/s 148A(d). AO added Rs.2,25,71,243/- as unexplained money u/s 69A treating sale proceeds of listed company shares (claimed as exempt LTCG) as unaccounted, & Rs.11,03,562/- as commission u/s 69C.
Before Tribunal, Assessee argued that approval for issuance of notice u/s 148 was obtained from PCIT, Delhi-15, whereas as per amended s.151(ii), for AY 2016-17 (beyond 3 years), approval should have been taken from PCCIT. Reliance was placed on SC judgment in UOI Vs Rajeev Bansal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 70 & Delhi HC in Rajesh Gupta HUF Vs ACIT (WPC 6057/2023, order 03.03.2025) which held that only PCCIT is competent authority for granting such approval. Similar ITAT rulings (Durga Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Communist Party of India (Marxist)) were also cited.
