PARWATI DEVELOPERS,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD 1(1) RANCHI, RANCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 was issued with approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CCIT), as required by the amended Section 151 of the Act. Consequently, the notice was deemed void ab initio.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The primary ground for challenge was that the notice under Section 148 was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period and with improper approval.
What were the issues?
Whether the notice issued under Section 148 for reassessment was valid, considering the limitation period and the authority that granted the approval as per Section 151.
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: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
PER: BENCH
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short, the ld. CIT(A) in Appeal No. NFAC/2016-17/10290804 dated 20/02/2026 for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sandipan Khan, ld. Sr.DR is represented on behalf of 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 and approval U/s 151. He stated that as per Section 149(1)(a) read with section 151 of the Act, a notice under Section 148 can be issued upto three years from the e
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 →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026