APEEJAY SURRENDRA PARK HOTELS LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 8(1), KLKATA

ITA 2417/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 October 2026AY 2018-20198 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act was invalid. The reopening was initiated after a period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year (AY 2018-19). According to Section 151 of the Act, for reopening beyond three years, the approval must be obtained from the Principal Chief Commissioner (PCCIT) or Chief Commissioner (CCIT). However, in this case, the approval for issuing the notice under Section 148A and the notice under Section 148 was granted by the Principal Commissioner (PCIT), Kolkata-1. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India and others Vs. Rajeev Bansal, which clarified that the specified authority for granting sanction under Section 151 is directly correlated to the time when the notice is issued. Non-compliance with the strict time limits prescribed under Section 151 affects the AO's jurisdiction to issue a notice under Section 148. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the reopening of assessment and the consequent assessment order. The assessee's appeal on this legal issue was allowed. The Tribunal did not decide the issues on merit, leaving them open for future consideration if necessary. The Revenue's appeal, which challenged the deletion of additions by the CIT(A), became infructuous due to the quashing of the assessment order and was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Apeejay Surrendra Park Hotels Ltd., filed its return for AY 2018-19 declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment under Section 147, issuing a notice under Section 148 on 27.04.2022, after passing an order under Section 148A(d) and considering the assessee's reply. The reopening was based on the ground that income of ₹31,50,00,000/- had escaped assessment. The assessee did not file a fresh return but complied with the notice under Section 142(1). The AO framed the assessment under Section 147 read with Section 144B on 24.03.2024, assessing total income at ₹14,63,33,383/-. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order on merits. Cross-appeals were filed by the assessee and the Revenue against the CIT(A)'s order dated 28.08.2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid, specifically concerning the approval obtained for issuing the notice under Section 148, as per Section 151 of the Act. Assessee's contention: The approval for issuing the notice under Section 148 was granted mechanically and not in accordance with the provisions of Section 151 of the Act. The assessee argued that for reopening after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the approval should be from the PCCIT or CCIT, not the PCIT. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the Revenue regarding this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 144B,Section 151,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR
For Respondent: Shri Nilkantha Chakraborty, DR
Hearing: 22.09.2026Pronounced: 07.10.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

These are cross appeals preferred by the assessee and Revenue against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.08.2025 for the AY 2018-19. ITA Nos. 2417& 2431/KOL/2025 ApeejaySurrendra Park Hotels Ltd.; A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2018-19 2417/KOL/2025 (Assessee’s appeal)

2.

At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee pressed ground no.1(e), which is extracted below:-

“(e) That on the fa

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →