Smt. Anita Banodha alias Anita Kathgar Vs PCIT (ITAT Raipur)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Raipur, considered an appeal challenging the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2018–19. The PCIT had revised the assessment order on the ground that the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to conduct proper enquiries regarding excess diesel shortage claimed by the assessee.
The assessee first raised a legal challenge to the reassessment proceedings, arguing that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was invalid. According to the assessee, the AO should have obtained two separate approvals from the specified authority—one under the proviso to Section 148 and another under Section 148A(d)—before issuing the notice. The assessee contended that since the same approval was relied upon for both provisions, the notice was invalid and the assessment order could not be revised.
The Tribunal examined the relevant statutory provisions, including Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2021. It observed that Section 148A requires the AO to conduct enquiry and obtain prior approval from the specified authority before issuing a notice under Section 148. The Tribunal held that compliance with Section 148A(d) and obtaining approval from the specified authority satisfies the requirement of the first proviso to Section 148. It concluded that the law does not require two separate approvals before issuing a notice under Section 148. Since the AO had obtained the necessary approval under Section 151 while following the procedure under Section 148A, the notice issued under Section 148 was valid. Accordingly, the legal ground raised by the assessee was dismissed.
