← All Phrases

“Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(34A) / Section 11762 judgments

The decision most relied on for Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax is Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (457 ITR 647), cited in 95 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
457 ITR 647 · 2023 · High Court
95
citing judgments

The amended Section 151 of the Income-tax Act, governing the sanction for reassessment proceedings under Sections 148 and 148A, applies to cases initiated under the new reassessment regime. The specified authority for granting such sanction becomes the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year.

Pradeep Himatlal Shah v. ITO
170 Taxmann.com 471 · 2025 · High Court
10
citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, issued beyond three years from the relevant assessment year, requires the sanction of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, and not merely the Principal Commissioner, for validity.

Judgments citing Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

Pankaj Surech Rach, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2290/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 50C

these notices travel back to the date of the original notice issued on 25th June 2021, even then the approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax should be obtained in terms of section 151(ii) of the Act as a period of three years from

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. Dr. Kamini Aravind Rao, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1482/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Dilip, Standing Counsel for DeptFor Respondent: Sri.Narendra Sharma, Advocate
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 64

learned DR has filed a paper book comprising of 46 pages including the copy of the Notification dated 15.11.2014 issued by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Karnataka & Goa Region (“Pr.CCIT” for short) and the case laws relied on. 4. The learned AR, on the other hand, submitted that