SUNIL RAMANAND PRAJAPATI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 41(1)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 420/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 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 under Section 148 was issued without the requisite sanction from the Pr. CCIT as mandated by Section 151(ii) of the Act, as it was obtained from the Pr. CIT instead.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). A notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued after more than 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid when issued after the expiry of three years and without the proper sanction as required by Section 151(ii).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151(ii),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Shri. Tanzil Padvekar
For Respondent: Smt. Smitha V. Nair (CIT DR)
Hearing: 15.05.2025Pronounced: 26.05.2025

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sunil Ramanand Prajapati Income Tax Officer, Ward A/3, Sai Dham Apartment, 41(1)(5), Mumbai Premier Road, Kurla (W), Vs. Room No. 830D, Kautilya Mumbai 400070 Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), PAN: ALDPP4988L Mumbai 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri. Tanzil Padvekar Revenue by : Smt. Smitha V. Nair (CIT DR) Date of Hearing : 15.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.05.2025 O R D E R Per: Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 16.12.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2.

Admittedly, in this case, notice dated 30.07.2022 u/s.148 of the Act was issued after elapsing of more than 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and therefore the sanction of Ld. Pr. CCIT was required to be taken as mandated u/s 151(ii) of the Act but not from the Ld. Pr. CIT as taken in this case and therefore the notice dated 30.07.2022 u/s.148 of the Act along with the Assessment order passed in pursuance thereof, is liable to be quashed. Thus the same is quashed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26.05.2025.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →