← All Phrases

“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

Arun Kumar Mittal, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2970/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

income-tax authority shall be deemed to be authenticated if name and designation is provided. In approval under Section 151 of the Act of 1961, name, designation and office is printed. Hence, submission of learned counsel for petitioner that approval is not digitally signed is also not sustainable, more ... found as a matter of fact that the recital in the order dated 28.10.2019 as well as order dated 26.11.2019 that the due approval under Section 151 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was taken from the competent authority is not liable to be interfered with in light of the insufficient

Shri Ravjibhai B Dhameliya, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 124/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

Rs.4,53,55,301/-, was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 15.02.2013. 7. Subsequently, after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval under section 151(1) the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the Pr. CIT-3, Surat, vide letter dated 30.03.2017, the proceedings under section 147 the Income

ACIT, Circle-3(3), Surat vs. Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 122/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

Rs.4,53,55,301/-, was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 15.02.2013. 7. Subsequently, after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval under section 151(1) the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the Pr. CIT-3, Surat, vide letter dated 30.03.2017, the proceedings under section 147 the Income

DCIT, Circle-3(3), Surat vs. Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 304/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

Rs.4,53,55,301/-, was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 15.02.2013. 7. Subsequently, after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval under section 151(1) the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the Pr. CIT-3, Surat, vide letter dated 30.03.2017, the proceedings under section 147 the Income

Shri Ravjibhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1(1), Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal for both the assessment years, that is,

ITA 239/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble(Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA and Shri Sapnesh Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

Rs.4,53,55,301/-, was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 15.02.2013. 7. Subsequently, after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval under section 151(1) the Income Tax Act, 1961 of the Pr. CIT-3, Surat, vide letter dated 30.03.2017, the proceedings under section 147 the Income

Cricket Australia, Australia vs. DCIT, Int, Taxation Circle-1(2)(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 605/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194E

Officer has reopened the assessment under Section 147 of the Act with complete non-application of mind. Unfortunately, the higher authorities while granting approval under Section 151 of the Act have approached the issue in a mechanical manner without verifying the facts. The concept of approval under Section 151 ... assessment under Section 147 of the Act. However, without examining the facts on record, both the Additional CIT and CIT have granted approval under Section 151 of the Act. Granting approval under Section 151 of the Act is not an empty formality. Approval has to be granted with caution

Cricket South Africa (Npc), South Africa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 604/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 194ESection 195

Officer has reopened the assessment under Section 147 of the Act on complete non- application of mind. Unfortunately, the higher authorities while granting approval under Section 151 of the Act have approached the issue in a mechanical manner without verifying the facts. The concept of approval under Section 151 ... assessment under Section 147 of the Act. However, without examining the facts on record, both the Additional CIT and CIT have granted approval under Section 151 of the Act. Granting approval under Section 151 of the Act is not an empty formality. Approval has to be granted with caution

Shri Chetas Karamshi Nandu, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward-22(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1589/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhchetas Karmshi Nandu Vs. Ito 22(1)(3) B/304, Jay Apartment, Room No. 314, 3 Rd Floor, Nehru Road, Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai-400055 Mumbai-400012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aijpn0030C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri. Prakash Kishinchandani
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

writ petition No. 930 of 2022 wherein notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was quashed on the ground that approval under section 151 of the Act was granted on the erroneous statement recorded in the reasons.. The learned counsel also referred decision of ITAT Ahmadabad

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(8), Surat vs. Mahaveer Shantilal Jain, Surat

ITA 453/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.453/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Mahaveer Shantilal Jain, Ward-2(3)(8), Prop. M/S Mukesh Diamonds, 1St Surat. Office No.401, Floor, H.No.5/1171/72/73/1090, New Dtc, Hath Falia, Haripura, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aqupj6439L Appellant By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 08/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

oppose the petition is that since the notice has been issued under section 148 read with Section 150 of the said Act, the approval under section 151 of the said Act is not required to be obtained is also misconceived. As stated earlier, first of all Section

Om Developers, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT 28(2), Navi Mumbai

ITA 1837/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm M/S Om Developers Dcit-28(2), Office No.14, Mahavir Centre, Vs. Sector No.17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Navi Mumbai 400 705 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafo9862A

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Shambhu Yadav, DR
Section 132Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 148

will be issued.” (Sudha Ramachandran) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-28(2) M/s Om Developers; A.Y. 2008-09 Mumbai. 06. The approval under section 151 was granted on 24/3/2015. Accordingly, under section 148 of the act was issued on 25/3/2015. 07. Fact shows that:- i. An agreement to sale

Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 699/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 234B

without any substantive material against the assessee and is merely a pretense. (v) the Pr.CIT has acted mechanically and perfunctorily while granting approval under Section 151 of the Act based on such vague information. The approval has been granted, firstly, on the basis of the assertion that Section

DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi vs. Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 9133/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

have been made in the instant case in the absence of any objective material. (ii) The competent authority has also granted a perfunctory approval under Section 151 of the Act in a mechanical manner 14 I.T.A. No.9133 & 7921/Del/2019 enabling the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment. Such mechanical approval

Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 7921/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

have been made in the instant case in the absence of any objective material. (ii) The competent authority has also granted a perfunctory approval under Section 151 of the Act in a mechanical manner 14 I.T.A. No.9133 & 7921/Del/2019 enabling the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment. Such mechanical approval

Bridge India Fund, New Delhi vs. ACIT (Int Tax) Circle-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 458/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Das, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

sold the same quantity of shares at ₹ 126,182,597 resulting into a loss of ₹ 30,877,605. Thereafter, after obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 (1)of the Act, case of the assessee was reopened on 31/3/2021 by recording the reasons and issuing the notice on the same ... reopening of the assessment. The objection raised by the assessee were perused, considered by the AO but were rejected. Assessee also challenged the approval under section 151 of the act which was also rejected. Therefore the learned AO intimated that all the prescribed provisions have been followed by the assessee

Bridge India Fund, New Delhi vs. ACIT (Int Tax) Circle-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 457/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 457/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Das, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

sold the same quantity of shares at ₹ 126,182,597 resulting into a loss of ₹ 30,877,605. Thereafter, after obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 (1)of the Act, case of the assessee was reopened on 31/3/2021 by recording the reasons and issuing the notice on the same ... reopening of the assessment. The objection raised by the assessee were perused, considered by the AO but were rejected. Assessee also challenged the approval under section 151 of the act which was also rejected. Therefore the learned AO intimated that all the prescribed provisions have been followed by the assessee

M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7289/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR
Section 148Section 151

that no valid approval under section eassessment on the ground that no valid approval under section eassessment on the ground that no valid approval under section 151 of the Act was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding. ct was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding. ct was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding ... valid approval We find that objection of the assessee of no valid approval We find that objection of the assessee of no valid approval under section 151 of the under section 151 of the Act has been disposed of has been disposed off by the Ld. CIT(A), observing

ITO 6 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S A J Coal Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5718/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shubham Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil, DR
Section 148Section 151

that no valid approval under section eassessment on the ground that no valid approval under section eassessment on the ground that no valid approval under section 151 of the Act was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding. ct was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding. ct was obtained for initiating reassessment proceeding ... valid approval We find that objection of the assessee of no valid approval We find that objection of the assessee of no valid approval under section 151 of the under section 151 of the Act has been disposed of has been disposed off by the Ld. CIT(A), observing

Shri Amarjeet Singh Bhatia, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations hereinabove

ITA 63/RPR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

DCIT (l)(l),Raipur has reason to believe of escaped income and the case was reopened by the same AO. * The DCIT obtained approval under section 151 of the Act on 20-03-2014. The DCIT circle(l)(l),Raipur issued notice under section

JCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1557/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 153C

challenged this fact that notice proceedings, the assessee nowhere challenged this fact that notice issued was without any approval issued was without any approval under section 151 151 of the Act. He further submitted that it is the assessee further submitted that it is the assessee, who asked the Assessing

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1054/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 153C

challenged this fact that notice proceedings, the assessee nowhere challenged this fact that notice issued was without any approval issued was without any approval under section 151 151 of the Act. He further submitted that it is the assessee further submitted that it is the assessee, who asked the Assessing