AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A), Jodhpur [in short ‘the CIT(A)’], dated 12.01.2026, for Assessment Year 2012-13.
Sh. Ashish Agarwal, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the assessee, at the outset, submits that he would be pressing only additional ground no. 3 of appeal challenging validity of the approval under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The assessee has raised additional ground of appeal vide application dated 05.05.2026. The solitary additional ground pressed by the assessee reads as under:
“S. No. 3 – On the facts and in the circumstances and in law, Ld. A.O. was wrong in issuing reasons to believe u/s 147(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (in col. No. 7) to issue notices) u/s 148 Dt. 08-03-2019.”
The learned counsel appearing for the assessee submits that the reasons for initiating proceedings under section 148 are recorded at pages 8 and 9 of the paper-book. The necessary approval u/s 151 of the Act for initiating proceedings u/s 148 of the Act is at page 6 & 7 of the paper book. A perusal of the Approval Form would show that the Assessing Officer has sought approval under section 147(a) of the Act. Clause (a) to section 147 was omitted from Statute w.e.f. 01.04.1989. The approving authority i.e. PCIT in a mechanical manner without looking at the reasons and the section under which the Assessing Officer is seeking approval, accorded approval for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. This clearly shows that the approval has been granted by the PCIT in a mechanical and perfunctory manner.
Per contra, Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR, representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and the approval granted by the PCIT. Learned Sr. DR submits that the approval note has been inadvertently mentioned as “under section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961”, in fact, it is clause (a) of the explanation 2 to section 147. He thus prayed for upholding the approval and the assessment order.
Both sides heard, documents referred during the course of submissions considered. The assessee has raised a solitary legal issue in the appeal challenging approval under section 151 of the Act. The short contention of the assessee is that the approval accorded for initiating proceedings under section 148 is mechanical. The assessee has drawn our attention to the approval at page 6 and 7 of the paper-book, which reads as under:
| 7. | Whether the provisions of sec. 147(a) or 147(b) are applicable or both the sections are applicable. | 147(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961 |
A bare reading of approval shows that there is specific mention to the provisions of section 147(a) of the Act and not clause (a) to explanation 2 to section 147 as argued by learned Departmental Representative. Clause (a) to section 147 has been repealed from the Act since 01.04.1989. Neither the Range Head nor the PCIT has bothered to read the contents of Approval Form before granting the approval. This clearly shows non-application of mind by the approving authority. The approval for initiating proceedings under section 148 of the Act is granted in a perfunctory and mechanical manner, hence unsustainable. The reopening of assessment fails to pass the test of judicial scrutiny since the mandatory approval is without application of mind. Thus, the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated and are liable to be quashed. I hold and direct accordingly.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.