2023 (8) TMI 1419 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening notices issued u/s 148 and orders passed u/s 148A(d) - authority which sanctioned for issuance of order u/s 148A(d) is the authority under Section 151(i) and not under Section 151(ii) - HELD THAT - Admittedly in these cases also the authority which sanctioned for issuance of order u/s 148A(d) is the authority under Section 151(i) and not under Section 151(ii) of the Act. As held in Siemens Financial Services Pvt Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8(2)(1) Ors. 2023 (9) TMI 552 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT the sanction ought to have been granted under Section 151(ii) and not under Section 151(i) of the Act. This applies to these petitions as well. Therefore orders passed under Section 148A(d) as well as notices issued under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed and set aside.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to orders passed u/s 148A(d) and notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for A.Y. 2016-2017.

Summary:
In the present case, the petitioners challenged the orders passed under Section 148A(d) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for the assessment year 2016-2017. It was noted that the authority sanctioning the orders under Section 148A(d) was under Section 151(i) instead of Section 151(ii) of the Act, which was held to be incorrect based on the judgment in Siemens Financial Services Pvt Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-8(2)(1). The court held that the sanction should have been granted under Section 151(ii) and not under Section 151(i) of the Act, which applied to the present petitions as well.

Therefore, without delving into other raised issues or grounds, the court, in light of the judgment in Siemens Financial Services Pvt Ltd., quashed and set aside the orders passed under Section 148A(d) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Act for the petitioners related to the assessment year 2016-2017. The petitions were disposed of with no order as to costs.