PRAKASH MANOHARLAL GOKLANI,ULHASNAGAR vs. NFAC, ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT , DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the case was reopened without proper sanction from the authorized authorities as required by Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the notice and assessment order were quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an order from the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) for AY 2017-18. The primary issue was the reopening of the assessment after three years from the relevant assessment year.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment after three years was validly sanctioned as per Section 151(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 151(i),Section 151(ii),Section 147,Section 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 28.10.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18.
Though the Ld. D.R. relied on the orders passed by the authorities below, however, it is the admitted fact that the case of the Assessee was reopened after three years from the end of relevant assessment year, by taking sanction from the Ld. Principal Commissioner as empowered u/s 151(i) of the Act but not from the Ld. Pr. Chief Commissioner or Pr. Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General, authorities authorized to grant such sanction, as required in this case and therefore there is violation of the provisions of section 151(ii) of the Act.
Thus, the notice dated 26.07.2022 along with the assessment order dated 09.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act is liable to be quashed, consequently the same is quashed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03.06.2025.
More judgments on Section 151(ii)
- Venkata Durga Agencies, Kakinada vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, KakinadaITA 692/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vanita Anil Mehta, Mumbai vs ITO 33(1)(1), MumbaiITA 7836/MUM/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- Tapan Jena, Balasore vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, BalasoreITA 566/CTK/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Richa Suchit Patel, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(3)(2), MumbaiITA 9169/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
- Tapan Jena, Balasore vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, BalasoreITA 566/CTK/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026