ITAT Quashes Reassessment for citing Invalid Section Reference by AO:

ITAT Quashes Reassessment for citing Invalid Section Reference by AO

ITAT quashes reassessment as AO cited Section 147(C); approval held mechanical Tribunal holds reopening void as AO cited Section 147(C), a provision not even on the statute books ITAT quashes reassessment as AO cited Section 147(C); approval held mechanical

Tribunal holds reopening void as AO cited Section 147(C), a provision not even on the statute books

authorMeetu KumaridateJul 1, 2025
Last update on Jul 1, 2025
ITAT Quashes Reassessment for citing Invalid Section Reference by AO After obtaining approval under Section 151, the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessee's assessment for AY 2006-07. However, the AO mistakenly cited Section 147(C), which wasn't applicable for that year. The assessee contested the reassessment, claiming it was approved without proper consideration. The Tribunal ruled it invalid, since the reopening relied on a provision that didn't exist, and the sanctioning authority didn't address the issue. The assessee then filed a cross-objection with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, protesting the reassessment order.
Tribunal Sends Back 4.66 Cr Deferred Revenue Case Due to Documentation Gaps
Main Issue: Whether the Assessing Officer's direct application of Rule 8D and failure to document the reasons for rejecting the taxpayer's own computation can uphold the disallowance under Section 14A.
Income Tax Trouble: Sapphire Foods Slapped with Rs. 27 Cr Demand Notice
Tribunal Held: The Tribunal made it very clear that citing a non-existent provision for reopening cannot be brushed aside as a minor error. The AO had filled out the approval form mentioning Section 147(C), which didn’t exist in the statute for AY 2006-07, and the Addl. CIT blindly approved it without correcting or noticing the flaw. The Tribunal leaned heavily on its earlier rulings in similar matters, where mechanical or non-speaking approvals under Section 151 were all held to be bad in law. The Tribunal also referred to the SC’s judgment in Chhugamal Rajpal and the MP High Court’s decision in S. Goyanka Lime & Chemicals, which was upheld by the Apex Court, to emphasise the importance of mindfully granted approval under Section 151. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2158
Up Next

Loading suggestions…