JOYASHREE GHOSH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(1), JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 was invalid because the approval for its issuance was granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CCIT), as required by Section 151(ii) for notices issued beyond three years. Consequently, the entire reassessment proceedings were quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on grounds of limitation and improper authorization for issuing the notice under Section 148. The notice was issued beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year.
What were the issues?
Whether the notice issued under Section 148 was valid when the approval for its issuance was not obtained from the 'specified authority' as per Section 151 of the Act, and if the notice was issued beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 149.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 07.07.2025 in Appeal No. NFAC/2016-17/10255027 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Shri Vishal Kumar, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Kailash V Gautam, ld Sr. DR appeared for the revenue.
At the outset, ld AR of the assessee has a challenged the proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act by issue of notice u/s.148 on the ground of limitation. He stated
P a g e 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2017-18
that as per Section 149(1)(a) of the Act, a notice under Section 148 can be issued upto three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, which in the present case relatable to AY 2017-18 would be 31.
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026