Rajbir Singh Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Reopening Quashed: ITAT Delhi Strikes Down 148 Notice for Wrong Sanction—PCIT Not Competent Authority
In this appeal, Rajbir Singh challenged the reassessment framed u/s 147/148, contending that the sanction for issuance of notice u/s 151 was obtained from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, whereas the law required approval from the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner since the notice was issued beyond three years from the end of AY 2013-14. Assessee relied on the Co-ordinate Bench decision in Amrit Pal Singh Vs ACIT & the Delhi High Court ruling in Communist Party of India (M) Vs ITO, wherein it was held that for notices issued after expiry of the statutory period, sanction must come from the higher authority prescribed in amended s.151(ii), & approval by PCIT is invalid.
Tribunal noted that the factual matrix was identical to that considered in Amrit Pal Singh & the Delhi High Court judgments which held that TOLA extension does not alter the hierarchy under s.151. Since more than three years had elapsed from the end of AY 2013-14, the required sanction was that of the Principal Chief Commissioner/Principal Director General/ Chief Commissioner/Director General, & not the PCIT. AO had admittedly obtained approval only from the PCIT, making the sanction defective & the reassessment void.
