Siddharth Raikumar Nahar Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
Mandatory Approval Violation: ITAT Quashes Reassessment Beyond 3 Years; 2. Reassessment Sanction Error: ITAT Rules PCIT Cannot Approve Beyond Three Years; Reassessment Quashed for Invalid Approval – ITAT Pune Rules Section 151 Violation Renders Notice Void
Assessee challenged reopening of assessment u/s 147, contending that the approval u/s 151 for issue of notice u/s 148/148A(d) was invalid, as it was granted by the Principal Commissioner (PCIT) instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner (PCCIT), though reopening was done after more than three years from the end of A.Y. 2017-18.
AO issued notices u/s 148A(d) & 148 dated 13.07.2022 & 15.07.2022, based on alleged cash loan of ₹5 lakh lent through another person. CIT(A) (NFAC) confirmed both the reopening & the additions u/s 69A & 56.
Before ITAT, the Assessee relied on Sanchit Kantilal Ganore v. ITO (ITA 1767/PUN/2025), Agnello Oswin Dias v. ACIT (161 taxmann.com 16, Bom HC), Holiday Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (159 taxmann.com 178, Bom HC) & Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (457 ITR 647, Bom HC), to argue that when reopening is beyond 3 years, approval must come from PCCIT/CCIT, not PCIT, & any deviation vitiates the proceedings.
