ASHOK RUDRARAJU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM

5. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre is not justified in making the addition of Rs. 30,12,755 /- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

6. All the above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another.

7. The appellant craves leave to add to; amend; alter; modify or delete all or any of the above grounds of appeal.”

Also, the assessee has raised additional grounds of appeal

, which reads as under:

9. The notice issued under section 148 dated 29.07.2022 is invalid as the same is issued by the Jurisdictional AO as against Faceless AO as per the scheme framed under section 151A and notified on 29.03.2022.

4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A).

6. The CIT(A), observing that the assessment in the case of the assessee was framed by the AO under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act, dated 15/05/2022, took recourse to the powers that were vested with him under the newly inserted “proviso” to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, w.e.f 01/10/2024 and set aside the matter to the file of the AO for making fresh assessment after taking into account the submissions filed by the assessee before him. For the sake of clarity, we deem it apposite to cull out the observations of the CIT(A), as under:

“6. DECISION: I have carefully considered the facts of the case, grounds of appeal and written submissions uploaded by the appellant. The ground wise decision on the appeal preferred by the appellant is as under: 6.1 Ground of appeal No. (1 to 5), 9 and 10 are inter-related and are adjudicated together. In these grounds, the appellant has submitted that 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and as per law the reopening of the case by issue of notice initially under section 148 dated 16.04.2021 is bad in law and is invalid and void ab initio.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and as per law the reopening of assessment for this year for the second time by issue of a notice under section 148 dated 29.07.2022 as per the ratio of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in UOI vs Ashish Agarwal is bad in law, invalid and void ab initio.

3. The notice issued under section 148 dated 29.07.2022 is stated to have been issued with the prior approval of Pr. CCIT, AP &TS Region, therefore the notice is invalid.

4. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the order passed under section 147 r.w.s 1448 dated 09.05. 2023 is barred by limitation 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the addition of Rs. 30,12,755 /- as unexplained money under section 69A is unjustified and invalid and not as per the provisions of section 69A (Additional ground) 9. The notice issued under section 148 dated 29.07.2022 is invalid as the same is issued by the Jurisdictional AO as against Faceless AO as per the scheme framed under section 151A and notified on 29.03.2022 10. The notice under section 148 dated 29.07.2022 is invalid as the same is issued without DIN No. The appellant has furnished its submissions etc. The claims made by the appellant are examined but are not acceptable without proper verification at AO level as evidences furnished needs to be examined through third party inquiries etc. in order to check the veracity of these claims. Further, any person who is earning income would be aware that any income earned is subject to taxation, unless specifically exempted. 6.2 However, as the appellant is now filing details before the CIT(A), nature and taxability of each entry needs to be examined in detail and necessary verifications. needs to be done to ascertain the truth of the claims being made by the appellant now. The same can only be done by the Assessing Officer. The issue on which addition has been made by AO needs to be examined separately. 6.3 As per the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act, Commissioner (Appeals) in case of order of assessment made u/s. 144 of the Act. may set aside such assessment and refer the case back to the AO for making a fresh assessment. This proviso has been inserted in the Act w.e.f. 1.10.2024. The said proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act is reproduced as under: "251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals)) shall have the following powers- (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment, Provided that where such appeal is against an order of assessment made under section 144, he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment) 6.4 Thus, as per the new provisions of section 251 effective from 01.10.2024 the CIT(A) has been granted powers to set-aside assessments to AO in cases where assessment order has been issued u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. As in the present case the assessment order has been issued u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the AO and there are issues which need to be further examined and investigated by the AO, it's a fit case for set-aside of assessment made by the AO. 6.5 Therefore, the assessment order passed by the AO u/s. 147 r.w.s144 of the I.T. Act dated 15.05.2023 is hereby set aside for making fresh assessment, de-novo, after taking into account the above submissions filed by the appellant. Needless to say that the AO should, while conducting the set aside proceedings, give proper opportunities of representation to the appellant in view of principles of natural justice and take into account any further submissions which it has to file during the course of the said proceedings. The AO should also conduct all necessary enquiries to verify the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is also directed to comply with all the notices/correspondences issued by the AO. 6.6 Ground No. 6 to 8 are general in nature, these ground are dismissed. 6.7 Therefore, the grounds filed in appeal filed by the appellant are thus dismissed and on quantum addition the case is set-aside for re- adjudication by the AO afresh.

7. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is disposed off.”

7. The assessee, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A), has carried the matter in appeal before us.

8. Sri I. Kama Sastry, the Learned Authorized Representative (for short, “Ld. AR”) for the assessee, at the threshold of hearing of the appeal assailed the validity of the assessment framed by the AO, inter alia, for the reasons, viz., (i) that the order under section 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022 and the notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022 were both passed/issued respectively, with the prior approval/sanction of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Visakhapatnam, as against the approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax as mandated by section 151(ii) of the Act for orders passed/notices issued beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year; (ii). that as the AO was in possession of information that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax that had escaped assessment amounted to Rs. 29,39,061/-, i.e., substantially less than the threshold amount of Rs. 50 lakhs, therefore, the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022, was barred by limitation as per the provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Act (as was applicable w.e.f 01/04/2021), as the said notice was issued beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year; and (iii). that as the impugned assessment under Section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 15.05.2023 had been framed by the Faceless Assessment Unit of the Income-tax Department, based on the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, dated 27.07.2022 and notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 27.07.2022 passed/issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), i.e., ITO-Ward 2(5), Visakhapatnam, in contravention of the scheme framed under Section 151A of the Act as was notified on 29.03.2022, therefore, in absence of valid assumption of jurisdiction the same cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed.

9. Sri I. Kama Sastry, the learned Authorized Representative (for short “Ld.AR”) for the assessee at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the A.O. had grossly erred in law and on facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction and framing the impugned assessment vide his order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 15/05/2023. Elaborating on his contention, the Ld. AR submitted that as notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022 for the subject year i.e. A.Y. 2016-17 had been issued by the A.O. beyond a period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, i.e., on 27/07/2022, therefore, as per the mandate of Section 151 of the Act, as was made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the said notice could have been issued only after obtaining the prior approval of the authorities contemplated in sub-section (ii) of Section 151 of the Act, viz. Principal Chief Commissioner/Principal Director General/Chief Commissioner /Director General. The Ld. AR submitted that the notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022, had been issued in the present case after obtaining the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Visakhapatnam, on 27/07/2022. The Ld. AR to fortify his contention had drawn our attention to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022, which revealed that the same was issued after obtaining the prior approval of Pr. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam, accorded on 26/07/2022 vide reference No. Pr. CIT-1/VSP/148A(d)/2022-23 (Page 22-23 of APB). Carrying his contention further, the Ld. AR submitted that as the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022 had been issued by the A.O. without obtaining the approval of the prescribed authority, therefore the said notice and the consequential assessment framed by him vide his order passed under Section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 15/05/2023 cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed on the said count itself.

10. Per contra, Dr. Aparna Villuri, learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”), on being confronted with the aforesaid factual position as was canvassed before us, failed to rebut the same. However, the Ld. DR submitted that as the A.O., after validly assuming jurisdiction, had issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 27/07/2022, therefore, no infirmity emerges from the assessment order passed by him. The Ld. Sr. DR, submitted that on a conjoint reading of Section 151 and the “5th proviso” to Section 149(1) of the Act, for reckoning the period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year as envisaged in Section 151 of the Act, based on which the specified authority whose sanction is required to be obtained for issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act is to be determined, the period allowed to the assessee as per the “Show Cause Notice” (SCN) issued under clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act has to be excluded. The Ld. Sr. DR to support her contention had drawn our attention to the “5th Proviso” of Section 149 of the Act. Also, the Ld. DR had relied on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai, in the case of Albert Joseph Rozario Vs. ITO (Intl. Tax), Mumbai, dated 22.07.2025.

11. The Ld. A.R. rebutted the contentions advanced by the revenue’s counsel. The Ld. AR submitted that the “Proviso” to Section 151 of the Act, which, inter alia, contemplates exclusion of the time period provided in the “5th proviso” of Section 149 of the Act for computing the period of three years had been made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2023, w.e.f 01.042023 and thus, cannot be applied retroactively to the subject year involved in the present appeal, i.e., AY 2016-17.

“Income escaping assessment- 147. If any income chargeable to tax, in the case of an assessee, has escaped assessment for any assessment year, the Assessing Officer may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Explanation.—For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A have not been complied with.”. Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment 148. Before making the assessment, reassessment or recomputation under section 147, and subject to the provisions of section 148A, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice, along with a copy of the order passed, if required, under clause (d) of section 148A, requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in such notice, a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant assessment year, in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed; and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if such return were a return required to be furnished under section 139: Provided that no notice under this section shall be issued unless there is information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year and the Assessing Officer has obtained prior approval of the specified authority to issue such notice. Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section and section 148A, the information with the Assessing Officer which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment means,— (i) any information flagged in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year in accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by the Board from time to time; (ii) any final objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India to the effect that the assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year has not been made in accordance with the provisions of this Act. Explanation 2.—For the purposes of this section, where,—

(i) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A, on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, in the case of the assessee; or (ii) a survey is conducted under section 133A, other than under subsection (2A) or subsection (5) of that section, on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, in the case of the assessee; or (iii) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned under section 132 or under section 132A in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, belongs to the assessee; or (iv) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, that any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned under section 132 or section 132A in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relate to, the assessee, the Assessing Officer shall be deemed to have information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the three assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search is initiated or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned or survey is conducted in the case of the assessee or money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents are seized or requisitioned in case of any other person. Explanation 3.—For the purposes of this section, specified authority means the specified authority referred to in section 151.” Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice under section 148- “148A. The Assessing Officer shall, before issuing any notice under section 148,—

(a) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (b) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority, by serving upon him a notice to show cause within such time, as may be specified in the notice, being not less than seven days and but not exceeding thirty days from the date on which such notice is issued, or such time, as may be extended by him on the basis of an application in this behalf, as to why a notice under section 148 should not be issued on the basis of information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in his case for the relevant assessment year and results of enquiry conducted, if any, as per clause (a); (c) consider the reply of assessee furnished, if any, in response to the showcause notice referred to in clause (b); (d) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148, by passing an order, with the prior approval of specified authority, within one month from the end of the month in which the reply referred to in clause (c) is received by him, or where no such reply is furnished, within one month from the end of the month in which time or extended time allowed to furnish a reply as per clause (b) expires: Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply in a case where,— (a) a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A in the case of the assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2021; or (b) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in the case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, belongs to the assessee; or (c) the Assessing Officer is satisfied, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that any books of account or documents, seized in a search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A, in case of any other person on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relate to, the assessee. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, specified authority means the specified authority referred to in section 151.” Time limit for notice- “149. (1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year,— (a) if three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the case falls under clause (b); (b) if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax, represented in the form of asset, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more for that year: Provided that no notice under section 148 shall be issued at any time in a case for the relevant assessment year beginning on or before 1st day of April, 2021, if such notice could not have been issued at that time on account of being beyond the time limit specified under the provisions of clause (b) of subsection (1) of this section, as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Finance Act, 2021: Provided further that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply in a case, where a notice under section 153A, or section 153C read with section 153A, is required to be issued in relation to a search initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets requisitioned under section 132A, on or before the 31st day of March, 2021: Provided also that for the purposes of computing the period of limitation as per this section, the time or extended time allowed to the assessee, as per show cause notice issued under clause (b) of section 148A or the period during which the proceeding under section 148A is stayed by an order or injunction of any court, shall be excluded: Provided also that where immediately after the exclusion of the period referred to in the immediately preceding proviso, the period of limitation available to the Assessing Officer for passing an order under clause (d) of section 148A is less than seven days, such remaining period shall be extended to seven days and the period of limitation under this subsection shall be deemed to be extended accordingly. Explanation.—For the purposes of clause (b) of this subsection, “asset” shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account. (2) The provisions of subsection (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.’ Sanction for issue of notice- “151. Specified authority for the purposes of section 148 and section 148A shall be— (i) Principal Commissioner or Principal Director or Commissioner or Director, if three years or less than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year; (ii) Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or where there is no Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General, Chief Commissioner or Director General, if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year.”

“5. We have heard Shri N. Venkataraman, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the Revenue and Shri C.A. Sundaram and Shri S. Ganesh, learned Senior Advocates and other learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective assessee.

6.1 Further pre Finance Act, 2021, the reopening was permissible for a maximum period up to six years and in some cases beyond even six years leading to uncertainty for a considerable time. Therefore, Parliament thought it fit to amend the Income Tax Act to simplify the tax administration, ease compliances and reduce litigation. Therefore, with a view to achieve the said object, by the Finance Act, 2021, sections 147 to 149 and section 151 have been substituted.

6.2 Under the substituted provisions of the IT Act vide Finance Act, 2021, no notice under section 148 of the IT Act can be issued without following the procedure prescribed under section 148A of the IT Act. Along with the notice under section 148 of the IT Act, the assessing officer (AO) is required to serve the order passed under section 148A of the IT Act. section 148A of the IT Act is a new provision which is in the nature of a condition precedent. Introduction of section 148A of the IT Act can thus be said to be a game changer with an aim to achieve the ultimate object of simplifying the tax administration, ease compliance and reduce litigation.

6.3 But prior to pre-Finance Act, 2021, while reopening an assessment, the procedure of giving the reasons for reopening and an opportunity to the assessee and the decision of the objectives were required to be followed as per the judgment of this Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra).

6.4 However, by way of section 148A, the procedure has now been streamlined and simplified. It provides that before issuing any notice under section 148, the assessing officer shall (i) conduct any enquiry, if required, with the approval of specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with the prior approval of specified authority; (iii) consider the reply of the assessee furnished, if any, in response to the show- cause notice referred to in clause (b); and (iv) decide, on the basis of material available on record including reply of the assessee, as to whether or not it is a fit case to issue a notice under section 148 of the IT Act and (v) the AO is required to pass a specific order within the time stipulated.

6.5 Therefore, all safeguards are provided before notice under section 148 of the IT Act is issued. At every stage, the prior approval of the specified authority is required, even for conducting the enquiry as per section 148A(a). Only in a case where, the assessing officer is of the opinion that before any notice is issued under section 148A(b) and an opportunity is to be given to the assessee, there is a requirement of conducting any enquiry, the assessing officer may do so and conduct any enquiry. Thus if the assessing officer is of the opinion that any enquiry is required, the assessing officer can do so, however, with the prior approval of the specified authority, with respect to the information which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.

6.6 Substituted section 149 is the provision governing the time limit for issuance of notice under section 148 of the IT Act. The substituted section 149 of the IT Act has reduced the permissible time limit for issuance of such a notice to three years and only in exceptional cases ten years. It also provides further additional safeguards which were absent under the earlier regime preFinance Act, 2021.

(i) The respective impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and treated to be showcause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The respective assessing officers shall within thirty days from today provide to the assessees the information and material relied upon by the Revenue so that the assessees can reply to the notices within two weeks thereafter;

(ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry with the prior approval of the specified authority under section 148A(a) be dispensed with as a onetime measure visàvis those notices which have been issued under Section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts;

(iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass an order in terms of section 148A(d) after following the due procedure as required under section 148A(b) in respect of each of the concerned assessees;

(iv) All the defences which may be available to the assessee under section 149 and/or which may be available under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law and whatever rights are available to the Assessing Officer under the Finance Act, 2021 are kept open and/or shall continue to be available and;

(v) The present order shall substitute/modify respective judgments and orders passed by the respective High Courts quashing the similar notices issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act irrespective of whether they have been assailed before this Court or not.

We are also of the opinion that if the aforesaid order is passed, it will strike a balance between the rights of the Revenue as well as the respective assesses as because of a bonafide belief of the officers of the Revenue in issuing approximately 90000 such notices, the Revenue may not suffer as ultimately it is the public exchequer which would suffer.

Therefore, we have proposed to pass the present order with a view avoiding filing of further appeals before this Court and burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals against the similar judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts, the particulars of some of which are referred to hereinabove. We have also proposed to pass the aforesaid order in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India by holding that the present order shall govern, not only the impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, but shall also be made applicable in respect of the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts across the country and therefore the present order shall be applicable to PAN INDIA.

10. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:

(i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be showcause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assesees can reply to the showcause notices within two weeks thereafter;

(ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a onetime measure visàvis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officers to hold any enquiry, if required;

(iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted);

(iv) All defences which may be available to the assesses including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available.

12. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only.

All these appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” (emphasis supplied by us)

“48. The proviso to Section 151 has been introduced by the Finance Act, 2023 with effect from 01.04.2023. The relevant Section 151 with its proviso is applicable to the case of the petitioner is quoted hereunder:

be assumed unless specifically expressed in the provision enacted by the legislature. Therefore, the reopening of assessment without sanction/approval of the specified authority in accordance with Section 151 of the Act was bad in law. Consequently, reassessment order dated 16.01.2024 also is bad in law.” (emphasis supplied by us)

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANJUNATHA G.) (RAVISH SOOD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 19th November, 2025 OKK / SPS Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Ashok Rudraraju, 27-6-47, Official Colony, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530026. 2 Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), O/o. ITO, Infinity Towers, Shankaramatttam Road, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530016. 3 The Pr.CIT, Visakhapatnam. 4 The DR, ITAT, Visakhapatnam. 5 Guard File By Order

Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.