Kamlesh Kukreja Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
ITAT Raipur Quashes Reassessment for AY 2016-17 Due to Invalid Sanction u/s 151(ii); PCIT Not Competent Authority Beyond 3 Years
The Raipur Bench of the ITAT, in Kamlesh Kukreja (Prop. Anmol Industries) vs. ITO [ITA No.119/RPR/2025, AY 2016-17, order dt. 01-01-2026], first condoned a delay of 156 days in filing the appeal, holding that procedural delays should not defeat substantial justice, relying on Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (SC) and Inder Singh vs. State of MP (SC).
On merits of jurisdiction, the Tribunal noted that reassessment proceedings were initiated beyond three years from the end of AY 2016-17 and that the order u/s 148A(d) dt. 27-07-2022 and notice u/s 148 dt. 29-07-2022 were issued after obtaining approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT). The Tribunal held that, as per section 151(ii), in such cases the competent sanctioning authority is the Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner, and sanction by PCIT is invalid.
Relying on Ramesh Bachulal Mehta vs. ITO (Bom HC) and Core Logistic Company vs. ACIT (Mad HC), the Tribunal concluded that lack of approval from the specified authority vitiates the very assumption of jurisdiction. Consequently, the entire reassessment proceedings were quashed. Since the assessee succeeded on this legal ground, additions of ₹2.59 crore u/s 69C and related 1% commission were not adjudicated and treated as academic. The appeal was allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT RAIPUR
