AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The present appeal arises from order dated 28.08.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. In this case, while the impugned addition pertains to an amount of Rs.7 lakhs disallowed by way of a deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80GGC of the Act, it is seen that the assessee has filed additional grounds of appeal which challenge the assumption of jurisdiction itself.
For the sake of reference the additional grounds of appeal are extracted as under: -
1.“That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) eared in sustaining the orders passed by Ld AO, due to assumption of Invalid Jurisdiction by Ld AO, BECAUSE:
•First Notice u/s 148A(b) by JAO was issued on 19-04-2023 & Notice dt 2-05-2023 u/s 148, which was subject to S. 149(b) i.e. income escapement not exceeding Rs.50 Lac, and failed to state the ingredients Clause (i) to (iii) of S. 149(b), as more than 3 Years have been elapsed from the end of relevant assessment year, AND the same fact has been accepted at the face of approval u/s 151 at SN-9.
•Approval u/s 151(ii) of PCIT has been taken instead of PCCIT [while passing order dt 02-05-2023 u/s 148A(d)], as more than 3 Years have been lapsed from the end of relevant AY as the fact has been accepted fey Ld AO at the face of approval u/s 151 at SN-9”
2.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) eared in sustaining the order passed by Ld AO, as the Assessment Order has been framed without getting any Mandatory Statutory Approval of Ld JCIT as per mandate of S.148B, as the matter has arisen from Search on 07-09-2022 on 23 RUPP at Ahmedabad and the matter falls under Clause (iv) to Explanation 2 to S. 148.
3.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) eared in sustaining the order passed by Ld AO, as no order u/s 127 has been passed if First Notice dt 30-03-2023 issued by ACIT Circle- 5GB Nagar, Noida (UP) [Non Jurisdictional AO] as basis in subsequent notices have been issued by ACIT Circle - 1 Gurugram HR.”
The Ld. AR argued with the help of a paper book and averred that the approval for issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act was obtained from the PCIT-Faridabad instead of the Pr. Chief Commissioner since the matter was older than three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, being AY 2019-20. The Ld. AR pointed out the chronology of event as under: -
First notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 19.04.2023;
Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 02.05.2023. It was pointed out that this notice was subject to the provisions of section 149(b) of the Act. The notable point here was that the income was below Rs.50 lakhs;
Approval obtained from PCIT-Faridabad on 02.05.2023. Here the Ld. AR pointed out that as per section 151(ii) of the Act the approval had to be obtained from Pr. Chief Commissioner since more than three years had elapsed from the end of the assessment year, being AY 2019-20;
The amount involved was Rs.7 lakhs and thus, the same was below Rs.50 lakhs as mentioned in section 149(1)(b) of the Act.
For all these reasons the Ld. AR stated that the assumption of jurisdiction was bad in law and thus, the entire proceedings deserved to be quashed.
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. It is seen that indeed the documents, including the statutory notices issued to the assessee, reveal that approval has been obtained from the PCIT and not from the PCCIT. Since this is a clear violation of section 149(1)(b) and section 151(ii) of the Act, hence, the impugned proceedings cannot be valid in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the assessment order is hereby directed to be quashed.
In the result, the appeal is allowed.