JAYESH SURESHCHANDRA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 27(1)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1855/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 April 2026AY 2017-182 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment order were void ab initio due to the lack of proper sanctioning authority. Therefore, both the notice and the assessment order were quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was reopened after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year by issuing a notice under Section 148. The prior approval for this notice was obtained from the Principal CIT, not the Principal CCIT as prescribed by Section 151(ii).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the incorrect sanctioning authority being obtained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151(ii),Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

For Appellant: Shri Vishrant Vora, Ld. CA
For Respondent: Shri Kiran K. Chhatrapati, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.04.2026Pronounced: 20.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH (SMC), MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1855/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 PAN: BOFPS1618A Jayesh Sureshchandra Shah, ITO, 27(1)(5), 4, Purnima Building, R.B. Mehta IT Office, Vashi Railway Vs. Marg, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai Station, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400077 Maharashtra- 400703 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vishrant Vora, Ld. CA Revenue by : Shri Kiran K. Chhatrapati, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.04.2026 O R D E R Per: Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 29.12.2025, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

Admittedly, the case of the assessee was reopened after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year by issuing notice dated 12th July, 2022 under Section 148 of the Act and by taking prior approval/sanction dated 08.07.2022 from the Principal CIT Mumbai, but not from the competent sanctioning authority i.e. Principal CCIT, as prescribed in the provision of Section 151(ii) of the Act. Thus, the notice issued under section 148 of the Act along

2 ITA No.1855/MUM/2026 Jayesh Sureshchandra Shah

with the assessment order dated 15th May, 2023 under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act passed in pursuance to such notice, is liable to be quashed being void ab initio. Hence, the same is quashed.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Z.U., P.S

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order

Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →