ANUSUA GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29, , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2372/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 December 2025AY 2014-201516 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29.03.2019, is invalid. The Tribunal noted that the approval for reopening the case was granted by the JCIT, Range-29, Kolkata, on 31.03.2019, which is subsequent to the date of issuance of the notice. This contravenes the provisions of Section 151(2) of the Act, as it stood at the relevant time, which requires the approval to be obtained prior to the issuance of the notice. Therefore, the notice issued under Section 148 was considered bad in law and was quashed. Consequently, the assessment order, which was based on this invalid notice, was also quashed. The appeal of the assessee was allowed. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Anusua Ghosh, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2014-2015. The primary issue under challenge was the notice issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice was generated on 29.03.2019. The assessee contended that the approval for issuing this notice was granted by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) on 31.03.2019, which was subsequent to the issuance of the notice. This, according to the assessee, violated Section 151(2) of the Act and rendered the notice, and consequently the assessment order, liable to be quashed. The revenue argued that Section 292BB of the Act should apply, and since the assessee cooperated in the assessment proceedings, the reopening should not be quashed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be quashed as being in violation of Section 151(2) of the Act, due to the approval for reopening being granted after the issuance of the notice? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notice under Section 148, issued on 29.03.2019, is invalid because the approval from the JCIT, Range-29, Kolkata, was granted only on 31.03.2019. This contravenes the requirement of Section 151(2) of the Act, which mandates that approval must be obtained before the notice is issued. Consequently, the assessment order based on this invalid notice should also be quashed. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that Section 292BB of the Act is applicable, and since the assessee participated in the assessment proceedings without challenging the reopening before the AO, the notice should not be quashed. The revenue also acknowledged that the order sheet details did not show evidence of approval being granted before 29.03.2019.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 151(2),Section 292BB,Section 147,Section 142(1),Section 143(2),Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Himmatsinghka, AR, Shri Altaf Hossain, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Shri Altaf Hossain, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 30/12/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.08.2024 for the assessment year 2014-2015.

2.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is challenging the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act. It was the submission that the notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued on 29.03.2019. Ld.AR drew our attention to page 1 of the paper book which reads as follows :-

It was the further submission that the reasons for the reopening was sent for approval by the JCIT only on 31.03.2019. Ld. AR drew our attention to page 2 of the paper book, which is the copy of the approval granted by the JCIT, Range-29, Kolkata, which reads as follows :-

4.

It was the submission that as the approval has been granted by the JCIT, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act is liable to be quashed as the same is in violation of the provisions of Section 151(2) of the Act as is stood then. It was the submission that consequently the assessment order is liable to be quashed.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that in view of the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act and the assessee having not challenged the reopening before the Assessing Officer but has cooperated in the assessment proceedings, the reopening should not be quashed. It was fairly agreed by the ld. DR that in the order sheet details as available on the ITBA portal, there is no evidence of the approval being granted before 29.03.2019. Ld. Sr. DR has placed before us the order sheet entries, which reads as follows:-

Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). 7. We have considered the rival submissions. Here it must be mentioned that when the matter was heard on 16.10.2025, the ld. DR was asked to provide the evidence to show that approval had been granted for the reopening on or before 29.03.2019. The order sheet entry made by the Tribunal reads as follows :-

8.

In consequence to the order sheet issued by the Tribunal, the ld.Sr. DR has provided the order sheet from ITBA portal which has been extracted hereinabove. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued on 29.03.2019 but the approval has been granted by the JCIT, Range-29 Kolkata on 31.03.2019. As the approval has been granted subsequent to the issuance of notice

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →