Amaan Naeem Akhtar Ansari Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench, in the case of Amaan Naeem Akhtar Ansari Vs ITO, set aside the reassessment proceedings and the consequential tax demand against the assessee for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The Tribunal held that the reassessment order was a legal nullity because the Assessing Officer (AO) obtained the mandatory prior approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the statutorily required Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT), as the notice was issued more than three years after the end of the relevant assessment year.
Condonation of Delay
The assessee’s appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) on the grounds of limitation. The assessee filed a detailed affidavit explaining the reasons for the 319-day delay, citing:
1. All official notices were sent to a demolished address (Room no 6, Haji Baugh Chawl, Santacruz East).
2. The assessee’s PAN records had no registered mobile number or email address until he filed his first-ever income tax return for A.Y. 2023-24 on July 25, 2023.
3. He received the final demand notice only physically on April 12, 2024.
The ITAT, citing the Supreme Court’s well-established principle in Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., which advocates for prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities of a non-deliberate delay, condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for a hearing on its merits.
