INCOME TAX OFFICER, INT TAX WARD 4(1)(1), MUMBAI V. PANKAJ SURESH RACH, MUMBAI

MA 84/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around a miscellaneous application (M.A. No. 84/Mum/2025) filed by the revenue against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2290/Mum/2024, which pertained to the assessment year 2017-18. The revenue challenged the Tribunal's decision to quash the assessment order on the grounds of an invalid notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, citing improper authorization. The Tribunal had previously relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT, which emphasized the need for proper authorization from the specified higher authorities for issuing notices after three years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal found no merit in the revenue's application and dismissed it, affirming the original decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633423 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2023] 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom.), Ashish Agarwal vs. UOI [138 taxmann.com 64]
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KRISHNA KUMAR; DR
• Assessee Lawyers: KINJAL BHUTA; AR
• Keywords: Set aside; Invalid notice
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

" | आयकर अपील य अ धकरण यायपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 84/Mum/2025 A/o I.T.A. No. 2290/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward, 4(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Pankaj Suresh Rach Palm Court Complex “H” Wing Flat No. 1102, Link Road Malad (W) Mumbai - 400064 [PAN: AJBPR9313B] अपीलाथ\u0012/ (Appellant) \u0014\u0015 यथ\u0012/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, A/R Revenue by : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 13/06/2024 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement: 13/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is directed towards the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2290/Mum/2025 dated 20/08/2024 pertaining to AY 2017-18. 2. The sum and substance of the present miscellaneous application is that the Tribunal erred in quashing the assessment order on the ground of invalid notice u/s 148 of the Act for want of proper authorization. The revenue contends that there is an error in the decision of the Tribunal and, therefore, the Tribunal should recall it earlier order and consider fresh hearing on merits of the case. M.A. No. 84/Mum/2025 2 3. Having heard the rival representatives, we have carefully perused the impugned order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2290/Mum/2024 dated 20/08/2024. We find that the Tribunal has quashed the notice because the approval sanctioned u/s 151 of the Act was by the PCIT and not by the PCCIT. In coming to this decision, the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2023] 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom.). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has followed the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal vs. UOI [138 taxmann.com 64 and has considered the provisions of Section 151 of the Act which defines specified authority for the purpose of Section 148 and Section 148A of the Act wherein it has been specifically provided that if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, then Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General shall be the specified authority. 4. Since in the present case the sanction was given by the Principal Commissioner of Income tax, the Tribunal set aside the notice u/s 148 of the Act. We do not find any merit in this miscellaneous application by the revenue and the same is dismissed. 5. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 13th June, 2025 at Mumbai. Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 13/06/2024 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs M.A. No. 84/Mum/2025 3 आदेश क \u0016\u0017त\u0018ल\u001aप अ े\u001aषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ! / The Appellant 2. \u0016\"यथ! / The Respondent 3. संबं&धत आयकर आयु(त / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु(त ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. \u001aवभागीय \u0016\u0017त\u0017न&ध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड. फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपील य अ&धकरण ITAT, Mumbai "