“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

Om Prakash Sharma, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2), Jaipur

ITA 258/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 258/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2009-10 Shri Om Prakash Sharma 1, N.H. 8, Sanskar Bharti P.G. College Bagru 303 007 (Raj) बनाम Vs. The ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: BWKPS 4112 G अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri S.B. Natani, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by :Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT -DR

For Appellant: Shri S.B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT -DR a

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

confirming the order passed by the learned AO under section 147/143(3) in pursuance to notice issued under section 148 unlawfully. 1. No Approval under section 151 is unlawful The learned AO was requested under letter dated 18.11.2019 copy of which is available on paper book page no. cited supra

Sanjivani Shikshan Sansthan, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 6(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 1207/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rahoan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR &

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

approval for issue of notice under 6-7 section 148 by JCIT, Rajge-6, jaipur to Ld. AO dated 31.03.2021. 4. Copy of approval under section 151 dated 31.03.2021. 8-10 5. Copy of notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2021. 11 11 Sanjivani Shikshan Sansthan, Jaipur. 8.1 To support

Vividhodhesha Prathamika Gramina Krushi Sahakara Sangha Ni Gejjalagere, Mandya vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Mandya

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2071/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Kothari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 254Section 80P

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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-25(1), Delhi vs. Vikas Strips Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Rule 27

ITA 2811/DEL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit, Vs. Vikas Strips Pvt. Ltd, Circle-25(1), 10, Ashoka Park, Rohtak Delhi Road, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcv7134J

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 68

reopened vide issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 30-3-2015. This notice was issued after obtaining approval under section 151 of the Act from the ld JCIT, Range 26, New Delhi. 5. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of iron

E Ashwath Narayan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1920/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri S. Satish, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 250Section 69A

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

Sunil Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 61(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2429/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshsunil Kumar Jain, Vs. Ito, C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv, Ward-61(3), F-26/124, Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Pan: Appellant Respondent Pan: Aaupj2703P Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15/04/2025

For Appellant: Dr. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

process of reassessment.” 4.1. In the aforesaid case, the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court also took note of the fact that the approval under section 151 of the Act was not obtained by that Assessing Officer as otherwise there could be no reason as to why the same

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 17/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

material before him for formation of that belief - Held, yes - Whether since in instant, case, there had been application of mind while granting approval under section 151, reopening of assessment was justified -Held, yes [Paras 2 and 3] In the case Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v Additional

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 16/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.13 To 17/Pun/2024

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 15/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 14/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 13/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

Nikesh Govindrao Rathod, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with no orders as to cost

ITA 3947/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Smt. Renu Jauhrinikesh Govindrao Rathod Vs. Ito, Ward – 41(2)(3) D-801, Teakwood, Room No. 732, Kautilya Swapnanagri, Vasant Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra Garden, Mulund (W), (E). Mumbai – 400080. Pan/Gir No. Atrpr6189D (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 250Section 68

issued after 2 Nikesh Govndrao Rathod, Mumbai obtaining the approval of the JCIT which was not the correct authority to grant approval under Section 151 (as it stood prior to its amendment with effect from 1-4-2021) when four years had already elapsed from the end of the assessment

Satish Kumar Saini, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Alwar

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

ITA 1526/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, C.A. (Thr. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 127Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 69A

notice under Section 148 of the Act. The assessee has alleged procedural lapses, including absence of valid service of notice, lack of proper approval under Section 151, absence of DIN on the order, and denial of reasonable opportunity to present his case during assessment proceedings. 9. Further we note that

Anju Daruka, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward - 3(1), Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2143/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: S/Shri Somnath Ghosh &For Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR

Section 04Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69A

Income-tax Officer (supra), wherein the Hon'ble court has held as under: - “12. We take note that request for approval under Section 151 of the Act in a printed format (Annexure P-6) was placed before the ACIT, who after according his satisfaction, placed the same before the PCIT ... assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 147/143(3) by holding the same to be invalid on the ground that the required approval under section 151(2) was granted by the concerned Id. CIT without recording her satisfaction. We accordingly uphold the impugned order of the Id. CIT(Appeals

Sudha Surana, New Delhi vs. I.T.O., Ward - 61(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1372/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Ito Ward-61(3) Bamboo Villa, Sudha Surana Central Revenue Building, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, F-26/124, Sector 7, Rohini, Vs. New Delhi-110085 Kolkata-700014, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Adepb5526F Assessee By : Dr. Kapil Goel, Ar Revenue By : Shri H. Robindro Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025

For Appellant: Dr. Kapil Goel, ARFor Respondent: Shri H. Robindro Singh, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 68

relevant AY, a further check by the further superior officer is contemplated." 12. We take note that request for approval under Section 151 of the Act in a printed format (Annexure P-6) was placed before the ACIT, who after according his Sudha Surana; A.Y. 2015-16 satisfaction, placed

ACIT Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jmp Securities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3792/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Acit, Circle-4(3)(1) Jmp Securities Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 801/806, 8Th Floor, Elite Square, 274, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400020. Vs. Perin Nariman St. Bazar Gate, Fort, Mumbai – 400001. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj8850C (Appellant) : (Respondent) C. O. No. 182/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3792/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Jmp Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(3)(1) 801/806, 8Th Floor, Elite Square, 274, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Perin Nariman St. Bazar Gate, Fort, Vs. Churchgate, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400001. Pan/Gir No. Aaacj8850C (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri. Omkandalkar Assessee By Respondent By : Shri. Hemankumar Chimanlal Leuva Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short)

For Respondent: Shri. Hemankumar Chimanlal Leuva

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 250Section 68Section 69

unwarranted, arbitrary and bad in law. 2. The impugned order dated 14.05.2024 passed by the NFAC upholding the validity of the approval under section 151 of the Act is in contravention of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Siemens Financial Services

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moderate Credit Corporation Pvt. Ltd., West Bengal

ITA 6223/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 147

facts of these cases before reopening. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-II, New Delhi has applied his mind while giving the approval under section 151 of the Act as he was fully aware of the entire facts of the cases after dealing the same during the course ... that these Income Tax Authorities have come to know the facts of these cases for first time when the approvals under section 151 of the Act of these cases were sent by the AO through the Range Head to the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-II, New Delhi. Since

Iqbal, Hardoi vs. ITO-3(2), Hardoi

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

ITA 64/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Iqbal V. Ito-3(2) C/O Sanjay Saxena Hardoi 12, Pratap Enclave Bisrat G.T. Road Shahjahanpur Tan/Pan:Aefpi2064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Saxena, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05 03 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 03 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Saxena, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271FSection 56(2)(vii)

into by the assessee during the year under consideration could not be filed before the AO. The Ld. A.R. also submitted that the approval under section 151 of the Act by the Office of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Sitapur Range was not proper. The Ld. A.R. prayed that ... after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. During the course of hearing, the Ld. A.R. had also argued that the approval under section 151 of the Act by the ITA No.64/LKW/2025 Page 6 of 6 Office of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Sitapur Range

Rakesh Mulchand Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-26(2)(5), Mumbai

ITA 6598/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Due Date For Filing The Return Of Income U/S 139(4) Viz. 31/03/2017, Thereby The Notice U/S.148 & Consequential Reassessment Order Passed U/S.147 Is Bad In Law;

For Respondent: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

factually incorrect and shows non-application of mind at the time of recording reasons as well as at the stage of grant of approval under Section 151 of the Act. If the reasons are tested on standalone basis, it clearly demonstrates non-application of mind by the Learned Assessing Officer

Omkara Impex and Merchandise LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 809/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.809/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omkara Impex & The Acit Merchandise Llp बनाम / Circle-3(3)(2) 301, Primate V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Judges Bungalows Road Bodakdev Ahmedabad - 380 054 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaefo 2861 K (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/03/2024, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"], Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao"] Under Section 147 R.W.S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15.

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

Trading Co. in Financial Year (FY) 2013-14. Accordingly, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 31/03/2021, after obtaining approval under Section 151. The assessee did not file its return of income in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. The AO issued