KAUSHALKUMAR NANDLAL KHANDELIA ,SURAT V. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURAT

ITSSA 2/SRT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Harshadkumar Maganlal Patel against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The primary legal issue was the validity of a notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which was challenged on the grounds that it was not sanctioned by the appropriate authority as mandated by section 151 of the Act. The Tribunal examined the provisions of sections 149 and 151, particularly focusing on the authority required to sanction notices issued after a specified period from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. The Tribunal concluded that the notice was issued without proper sanction, rendering it void and the subsequent proceedings also void ab initio.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832322 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: K. GOPAL
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.(IT)A. No. 2/SRT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Appellant by : Shri K. Gopal, AR Respondent by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 22.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.11.2024, under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The legal position for approval under section 151 is as under: Sections 149 and 151 of the Act have been enacted for different purposes and operate in different situations. While Section 149 of the Act, prescribes limitation for issuance of notice u/s. 148 and 148A of the Act, Section 151 of the Act prescribes the timeline for the specified authority to grant sanction for Section 148 and 148A of the Act. Prior to insertion of proviso u/s. 151 of the Act by Finance Act, 2023 w.e.f. 01.04.2023, the specified authority who can grant sanction for initiating proceedings u/s. 148A and issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act after expiry of three years from the end of the assessment year is PCCIT/CCIT in terms with Section 151(ii) of the Act. Hence, in absence of any enabling provision u/s. 151 of Harshadkumar Maganlal Patel, 9-11, Mira Nagar Soceity, Opp – Patel Samaj Bhavan Sardar Chowk, Varachha, Surat [PAN: AADPP6513E] Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1(2), Surat (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Printed from counselvise.com IT(IT)A No.2/Srt/2025 Harshadkumar Maganlal Patel Asst. Year: 2018-19 - 2– the Act, the 3rd, 4th and 5th or 6th provisos of Section 149(1) of the Act cannot be read into Section 151 of the Act to extend the time limit u/s. 151(i) of the Act. 3. In the appeal before us pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018-19, the notice u/s 148 of the Act has been issued on 21.04.2022. As per the provisions of section 151 of the Act, the sanction of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act has to be by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General if more than 3 years have elapsed from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. Since the approval has been given by the Principal Commissioner who is not the right authority in this case, the fact of which has not been disputed by the Revenue, we hold that notice issued by the Revenue is void and hence, the subsequent proceedings are hereby treated as void ab initio. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 22.01.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Surat; Dated 22.01.2026 **SAMANTA आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,/ DR, ITAT, Surat 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Asstt. Registrar, Surat Printed from counselvise.com "