“approval under section 151”

ReassessmentSection 151Section 151453 judgments

The decision most relied on for approval under section 151 is CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd. (64 Taxmann.com 313), cited in 340 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on approval under section 151

CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd.

64 Taxmann.com 313 · 2015 · Supreme Court

340

citing judgments

A mechanical approval by the prescribed authority under Section 151, made without independent application of mind, vitiates and renders the entire reassessment proceedings invalid. Such approvals, often indicated by brief, unreasoned endorsements, lead to the quashing of the reopening of assessment.

Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO

156 Taxmann.com 178 · 2023 · High Court

213

citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if the Income Tax Department fails to follow the prescribed procedures, including obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 or adhering to the faceless assessment scheme mandates under section 151A.

Madhya Pradesh in CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemicals Ltd.

56 Taxmann.com 390 · 2015 · High Court

188

citing judgments

A sanction for issuing a notice under section 148 is invalid if the sanctioning authority grants approval mechanically, merely recording 'Yes, I am satisfied' without proper application of mind to the reasons for reassessment. The authority must demonstrate proper consideration to fulfill the statutory obligation under section 151.

Narayanappa v. CIT

63 ITR 219 · 1967 · Supreme Court

187

citing judgments

The approval required from a higher authority under section 153D of the Income Tax Act is an administrative act, not a quasi-judicial one. Consequently, an opportunity of hearing is not required to be given to the assessee at the stage of obtaining such approval, provided the approving authority is competent.

CIT v. SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd.

345 ITR 223 · 2012 · High Court

164

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the sanction required under Section 151 is obtained mechanically, without independent application of mind by the sanctioning authority, or is based on borrowed satisfaction.

Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT

398 ITR 198 · 2017 · High Court

137

citing judgments

Sanction under Section 151 granted in a mechanical manner, without application of mind, vitiates reassessment proceedings under Sections 147 and 148. The court also laid down guidelines for the Revenue to follow when reopening assessments, emphasizing the need to provide reasons and approval documentation to the assessee.

Verma Roadways v. ACIT

75 ITD 183 · 2000 · ITAT

130

citing judgments

Approval for assessment orders requires proper and thorough scrutiny and application of mind by the approving authority, involving an enquiry and judicial approach.

Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC

82 ITR 147 · 1971 · Supreme Court

129

citing judgments

To initiate reassessment under Section 147/148, the Income Tax Officer must have an honest and reasonable 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, based on cogent grounds and not mere suspicion. Reassessment is invalid if based only on a lack of analysis during the original assessment without new material.

Judgments citing approval under section 151

Niraj Sarju Mandal, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 41(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee succeeded on the primary submissions of his ld AR

ITA 2294/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Niraj Sarju Mandal Dcit Central Circle-41(3)(1), B-503, Sankalp 2, Goregaon Link Road, Vs Kautilyabhavan, Bandrakurla Pimpripada, Malad, Mumbai-400097. Complex, Bandra (East), [Pan No. Ahupm1815G] Mumbai – 400051. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 254(1)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical hearing) Niraj Sarju Mandal

Devendra Pratap Singh, Kumarganj Faizabad vs. ITO-1, Faizabad-New, Faizabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 176/LKW/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Purnodaya Kumar Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

basis for presuming escapement in a case where an assessee file returns and is regularly assessed to tax. We have also perused the approval under section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 that has been accorded by the Joint CIT, Faizabad Range and which is given on page

Ali Mohammad, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5608/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5608/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Ali Mohammad Acit, Mohalla Kot Kachchi Saray, Vs. Circle-2(1)(1), Murad Nagar, Ghaziabad, Ghaziabad. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Etopm2968E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 3

passing the re-assessment order without there being valid sanction as contemplated under Section 151 of the Act. He submitted that prior approval under Section 151 of the Act is mandatory. From the copy received by the Petitioner, it is clear that the notice was issued ... held as under: - “Facts:- 5. In this batch of writ petitions, the admitted facts are that on the basis of unsigned alleged digital approval under Section 151, Assessing officer issued notices to the assessees under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. The point of time when the aforesaid approval under

Amarjit Singh, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1) Ludhiana, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1171/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1171 /Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Amarjit Singh बनाम The ITO C/o V V Bhalla & Company Ward 6(1) SCF-39, Rishi Nagar Main Market, Ludhiana Adjoining Subway, Ludhiana-141001, Punjab स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABTPS8558B अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 144ASection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)Section 270A

including dismissal by Ld. CIT(A) without proper notice, invalid initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 148 read with section 144A, and defective approval under section 151. The assessee also disputed the addition of Rs 17,41,400/- under the head “Short Term Capital Gain” and the initiation of penalty ... also followed by initiation of penalty proceedings under the mentioned sections. The assessee objected to the reassessment proceedings on grounds of invalid approval under section 151, lack of opportunity of being heard, and non-adherence to the procedure under sections 147, 144, and 144B. 4. Against the order

Parvinbanu Mayudin Kazi, Anand vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (Previously Ward-5), Anand

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 595/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2011-12 Parvinbanu Mayudin Kazi Ito, Ward-1 50/51, Sabnam Society Vs. Anand. Nr. New Water Tank Anand, Gujarat. Pan : Awppk 5536 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri B.T. Thakkar, Ar Assessee By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Makarand V.Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.05.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”], For A.Y. 2011–12, Confirming The Addition Of Rs.9,81,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 69A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, In Respect Of Cash Deposits In Her Savings Bank Account Vide His Order Dated 26.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

assessee had not filed the original return of income. Proceedings under section 147 were initiated after recording reasons and obtaining 3 approval under section 151. Notice under section 148 was issued on 27.03.2018. The assessee filed return on 31.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.1,74,244/-. The AO issued notices

Sri Lanka Cricket, Sri Lanka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Tax) Circle- 3 (1)(2), New Delhi

ITA 1603/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 14Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 270A

Limited (2011) (15 taxmann.com 175) (Mumbai Tribunal) 4.4 Further, it was submitted that the case of the assessee was reopened without having valid approval under section 151(ii) of the Act as the said approval under section 148D of the Act was approved by the Commissioner of Income Tax, (International

Sylvan Greens Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Bhala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 801C

system- 11 ITA NO.414.JPR/2025 SYLVAN GREEN PRIVATE LTD VS DCIT,CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR 2. lack of signature generated of PCIT on approval under section 151 3. No reply 3. lack of signature of person who has recorded the reason From the above reply of Ld AO it is clear ... that approval under section 151 is system -generated hence the PCIT has not given his satisfaction personally. According to section 151. (1) No notice shall be issued under section 148 by an Assessing Officer, after the expiry of a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment

Pamela Bhardwaj, Karnal vs. ITO, Ward- 3, Karnal

ITA 2595/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Khettra Mohan Royassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 263(1)

have led to the formation of belief of escapement of income by the assessee as alleged or that no valid satisfaction and/or approval under Section 151 was obtained or that the impugned reassessment order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act without complying the mandatory conditions

Piyush Kumar Sarda, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 542/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.542/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-19) Piyush Kumar Sarda Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 44(2) 3/1B, Sir Hari Ram Goenka Street, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Pan No. : Atbps 4944 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 3

states that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment without mentioning what is the amount of income that has escaped assessment. Further, the approval under Section 151 of the Act which is annexed to the impugned order is of one Poonam Vijay Chhabria whose PAN number is also entirely different

Basant Aerospace Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-5, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for assessment year 2016-17

ITA 2292/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri V. K. Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

that even the competent authority had not examined the basic facts from the evidences placed on record and had merely granted a mechanical approval under section 151 of the Act which becomes fatal to the entire reassessment proceedings. In the instant case, the Assessee Company had indeed sought for approval

Basant Aerospace Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-5, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for assessment year 2016-17

ITA 520/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri V. K. Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Amrit Pal Singh Chadha, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2794/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 2794/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Amrit Pal Singh, Vs Acit, 4410, Dlf, Phase-Iv, Central Circle-19, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aewpc3215P Assessee By: Sh. Amar Jeet Singh, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.07.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)-27, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024-25/1073779465(1) Dated 27.02.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Amar Jeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 29A

General or where there is no such authority, by Chief Commissioner or Director General. The determination of the specified authority for grant of approval under Section 151 of the Act depends on whether the notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued after the expiry of three years

Raj Kumar, Chandausi vs. ITO-2(5), Chandausi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3238/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royraj Kumar Vs. Ito, 2(5) Mohalla Ratan Income Tax Office, Chandausi Behind Sm Degree Uttar Pradesh - 202412 College, Chandausi Uttar Pradesh – 202412 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aqmpk9324M Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Pranav Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Harpreet Kaur Hansra

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

issued and assessment was completed upon making addition in the hands of the assessee. In addition to that, the approval under Section 151 of the Act granted by the PCIT is evidently mechanical in nature as also submitted by him and a copy of the approval letter dated ... said authority is also evident from such noting made by the PCIT. Having regard to this particular aspect of the matter the approval under Section 151 of the Act, since, admittedly mechanical one and without application of mind, the reassessment proceeding itself initiated upon issuance of notice under Section

Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 467/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:467/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Vs. Income Tax, No.64, Dr. Nanjappa Road, Central Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore. [Pan:Aabci-0022-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T.

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

wherein it was held as under: “ 6. Facts of Writ Tax No. 554 of 2022 are that as per approval under section 151 of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (for short 'PCIT ... wherein it is held as under: :-10-: ITA. No:467/Chny/2025 “ 6. Facts of Writ Tax No. 554 of 2022 are that as per approval under section 151 of the Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, the Principal Commissioner of Income

Namita Agrawal, Uttrakhand vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Dehradun, Income Tax Office

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 13/DDN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2019-20] Namita Agrawal, Vs Dcit, 36/1, E C Road, Dehradun, Central Circle, Uttarakhand-248001 Dehradun Pan-Afspa0668P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. & Shri Naman Jain, Adv. Revenue By Shri S.K.Chaterjee, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2025 Order

Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69B

basis of material placed before it before grant of sanction. 14. A perusal of the record reveals that the request for approval under section 151 of the Act in a printed format was placed before the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax ("PCCIT") on March 20, 2023. The Principal Chief ... weighed in the grant of approval. The mere appending of the word "approved" by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax while granting approval under section 151 to the reopening under section 148 is not enough. While the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax is not required to record elaborate

DCIT, Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infraprojects Limited, Mumbai

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4593/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

registry on 29.11.2024: “1. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice under section 148 of the Act by obtaining a properly signed approval under section 151 of the Act. 2. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice u/s.148 of the Act in violation of section 151A ... Krishi Kendra v. Union of lndia (2022) 444 ITR 584, wherein the Hon'ble Court specifically dealt with the question of an unsigned approval under Section 151 of the Act. In para 14 of the judgment, itwas unequivocally held thatanapproval bearing thename, designation, and office of the authority, would

DCIT CC 5-1, Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infraprojects Limited, Mumbai

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

ITA 4591/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4590/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 69A

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is

ITA 4589/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain&

Section 250Section 69A

registry on 29.11.2024: “1. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice under section 148 of the Act by obtaining a properly signed approval under section 151 of the Act. 2. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice u/s. 148 of the Act in violation of section 151A ... Krishi Kendra v. Union of India (2022) 444 ITR 584, wherein the Hon'ble Court specifically dealt with the question of an unsigned approval under Section 151 of the Act. In para 14 of the judgment, itwas unequivocally held thatanapproval bearing thename, designation, and office of the authority, would

DCIT CC 5 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. J Kumar Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is

ITA 4588/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain&

Section 250Section 69A

registry on 29.11.2024: “1. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice under section 148 of the Act by obtaining a properly signed approval under section 151 of the Act. 2. The Ld. AO erred in issuing a Notice u/s. 148 of the Act in violation of section 151A ... Krishi Kendra v. Union of India (2022) 444 ITR 584, wherein the Hon'ble Court specifically dealt with the question of an unsigned approval under Section 151 of the Act. In para 14 of the judgment, itwas unequivocally held thatanapproval bearing thename, designation, and office of the authority, would