ITAT Quashes Reassessment for Mechanical Approval Under Section 151:

ITAT Quashes Reassessment for Mechanical Approval Under Section 151

Section 151 Approval Without Independent Application of Mind Renders Reassessment Void

ITAT Quashes Exel Rubber Reassessment Over Mechanical Approval

authorMeetu KumaridateMar 3, 2026
Last update on Mar 3, 2026
ITAT Quashes Reassessment for Mechanical Approval Under Section 151 The appellant, M/s. Exel Rubber (P) Ltd, challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer (AO) had reopened the assessment based on information suggested by certain seized materials.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
However, the petitioner argued that the mandatory approval required from the "prescribed authority" under Section 151 of the Act was granted mechanically. It was contended that the approving authority merely repeated the AO's observations without any independent verification of the seized materials or the alleged escapement of income. Issue Before Court: Whether the reassessment notice issued under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment order are valid if the prescribed authority granted the statutory approval under Section 151 without an independent application of mind.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
ITAT's Ruling: The ITAT allowed the appeal and quashed both the Section 148 notice and the resulting assessment order. The Tribunal observed that the approval granted under Section 151 is a crucial safeguard against arbitrary reopening of assessments. In this case, the Bench found that the prescribed authority had blindly followed the AO's report without independent verification. The Tribunal held that such "mechanical approval" is not in conformity with the law and renders the entire proceeding void ab initio. Since the very foundation of the reassessment was bad in law, the later assessment order could not be sustained. 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
2166
Up Next

Loading suggestions…