ABHINAV JINDAL HUF Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of writ petitions assails the validity of the reassessment action initiated by the respondents under Sec. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 'Act' and pertaining to Assessment Year 'AY' 2015-16. The solitary ground on which those reassessments were assailed before us was a violation of the provisions contained in Sec. 151 of the Act.

(2.) It is the case of the writ petitioners that the sanction for initiation of reassessment action rests on an approval granted by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax 'CIT' as opposed to the Principal Chief Commissioner /Chief Commissioner/ Principal Commissioner/ Commissioner as mandated by Sec. 151(1) of the Act. It is contended that since all the impugned Sec. 148 notices have come to be issued after the expiry of a period of four years from the concerned AY, they were liable to be mandatorily approved by the Principal Chief Commissioner or the other authorities specified in sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 151.

(3.) According to the writ petitioners, the impugned notices would not sustain even if they were tested on the basis of Sec. 151 as it came to exist on the statute book after Finance Act 2021. It becomes pertinent to note that after the passing of the Finance Act 2021, Ss. 148 and 148A introduced the concept of 'specified authority' as the designated officer which would be liable to accord sanction for reassessment and which expression was defined by Sec. 151. In terms of Sec. 151(i) after the passing of the Finance Act 2021, if the notices for reassessment were issued where 'three years or less than three years' had elapsed from the end of the relevant AY, the action would have to be based on the approval of the Principal Commissioner/Principal Director/Commissioner/Director. In all other cases, and which would relate to those reassessments which were proposed to be commenced 'if more than three years' had elapsed from the end of the concerned AY, the authorities empowered to accord approval were specified to be the Principal Chief Commissioner/ Principal Director General/ Chief Commissioner/ Director General. The petitioners would contend that viewed from any angle and irrespective of whether the unamended Sec. 151 or the provision as it came to form part of the statute post Finance Act 2021, the approval of reassessment by the JCIT would not sustain.