9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard because that was the requirement of law as it stood in the year 1988 relating to the assessment year 1988-89. Admittedly, the petitioner received a notice in terms of section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the notice is dated December 8, 1998), whereby the petitioner was informed by the Assessing Officer that he had reasons to believe that his income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 1988-89 had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and that, therefore, the Assessing Officer proposed to reassess the income for the aforesaid assessment year and accordingly notice under section 148 of the Act was issued asking the petitioner to deliver to the Assessing Officer within 30 days from the date of service o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner, after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the Joint Commissioner is satisfied, on the reasons recorded by such Assessing Officer, that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice." Whereas sub-section (1) of section 151 deals with only such cases where the assessment earlier was made under section 143(3) or under section 147 of the Act, sub-section (2) deals with all other assessments which were earlier made, but which were sought to be reopened under section 147 of the Act. In this case, since the assessment for the year 1988-89 was made in terms of section 143(1) of the Act, we are concerned only with sub-section (2) of section 151 of the Act. It is worth noticing that section 151 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the old section 151(1) of the Act, the approval of the Board was required, sub-section (2) of section 151, as it presently stands, requires approval of the joint Commissioner if the proceedings have to be initiated by the Assessing Officer at a point of time four years after the original assessment order was passed. The contention of Mr. Moitra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, is that since in the present case approval of the joint Commissioner and not the Board has been obtained by the Assessing Officer, the proceedings initiated as based on the notice issued under section 148 of the Act are invalid because the law applicable to the case of the petitioner is under section 151(1) of the Act as it stood prior to its amendme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... go back to a law which stood at a point of time when the original assessment order was passed. Obtaining the approval of a superior officer is procedural in nature. Whether the approval of the Board is to be obtained or that of the joint Commissioner is not substantive in nature. Therefore, for the purpose of obtaining the approval, the Assessing Officer has to apply the law as it stands on the date when he decides, by recording his reasons, to invoke section 147 of the Act and, thus, decides to issue notice under section 148 of the Act. For doing this, he has not to look at the law which stood at a point of time when the original assessment order was passed. There is another angle to this aspect of the applicability of the law on the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
