" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Anusua Ghosh, C/o P.K.Himmatsinghka & Co. 41, B.B.Ganguly Street, Central Plaza, 2nd Floor, Kolkata Vs ACIT Cirlce-29, Kolkata PAN No. :AEKPG 9208 E (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri P.K.Himmatsinghka, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Altaf Hossain, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 30/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 30/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.08.2024 for the assessment year 2014-2015. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is challenging the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act. It was the submission that the notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued on 29.03.2019. Ld.AR drew our attention to page 1 of the paper book which reads as follows :- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 2 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 3 3. It was the further submission that the reasons for the reopening was sent for approval by the JCIT only on 31.03.2019. Ld. AR drew our attention to page 2 of the paper book, which is the copy of the approval granted by the JCIT, Range-29, Kolkata, which reads as follows :- 4. It was the submission that as the approval has been granted by the JCIT, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act is liable to be quashed as the same is in violation of the provisions of Section 151(2) of the Act as is stood then. It was the submission that consequently the assessment order is liable to be quashed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 4 5. In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that in view of the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act and the assessee having not challenged the reopening before the Assessing Officer but has cooperated in the assessment proceedings, the reopening should not be quashed. It was fairly agreed by the ld. DR that in the order sheet details as available on the ITBA portal, there is no evidence of the approval being granted before 29.03.2019. Ld. Sr. DR has placed before us the order sheet entries, which reads as follows:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 5 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 6 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 8 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 9 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 10 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 11 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 12 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 13 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 14 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 15 6. Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). 7. We have considered the rival submissions. Here it must be mentioned that when the matter was heard on 16.10.2025, the ld. DR was asked to provide the evidence to show that approval had been granted for the reopening on or before 29.03.2019. The order sheet entry made by the Tribunal reads as follows :- 8. In consequence to the order sheet issued by the Tribunal, the ld.Sr. DR has provided the order sheet from ITBA portal which has been extracted hereinabove. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued on 29.03.2019 but the approval has been granted by the JCIT, Range-29 Kolkata on 31.03.2019. As the approval has been granted subsequent to the issuance of notice Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2372/KOL/2024 16 u/s.148 of the Act, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019 is held to be invalid as without requisite approval as required u/s.151(2) of the Act as is stood then. This being so, the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act is bad in law and the same stands quashed. As the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act held to be invalid and the same has been quashed by us, the consequential assessment based on the invalid notice also stands quashed. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/12/2025. Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 30/12/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "