Nikhil Nagindas Modi Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court)
Summary: The Bombay High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Nikhil Nagindas Modi challenging the notice dated 30 March 2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2017-18 and the order dated 10 March 2022 disposing of his objections. The Court found that the approval under Section 151 was unsigned and held that, in the absence of the required signature, there was no valid approval before issuance of the Section 148 notice. Referring to Sections 151 and 282A(1), the Court held that an approval is an “other document” and must be signed by the approving authority. The Court also rejected the Revenue’s contention that a valid Document Identification Number, electronic transmission or authentication under Section 282A(2) could substitute the mandatory signature. Relying on the principles stated in Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal, Vikas Gupta v. Union of India and Ambernath City Hospital (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India, among others, the Court held that the defect was jurisdictional. The Court therefore allowed the petition, quashed the challenged proceedings and notices, made the Rule absolute and disposed of the writ petition without costs.
Challenge to Reassessment for AY 2017-18
The Bombay High Court considered a writ petition filed by Nikhil Nagindas Modi challenging the notice dated 30 March 2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order dated 10 March 2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre disposing of his objections against initiation of reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2017-18.
