| COURT: | ITAT Mumbai |
| CORAM: | R. C. Sharma (AM), Vivek Varma (JM) |
| SECTION(S): | 147, 151 |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | Reopening, sanction |
| COUNSEL: | Dr. K. Shivram |
| DATE: | January 2, 2015 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | February 13, 2015 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2003-04 |
| FILE: | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 147/151: Non-mentioning in the reasons that approval has been obtained from the CIT vitiates the reopening | |
Another major discrepancy noticed during the course of arguments is that there is no mention of authorization of a higher authority to initiate the current reassessment proceedings. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of DSJ Communications vs DCIT, reported in 222 Taxman 129 (Bom), held that approval of CIT is mandatory. Since there is no mention of the approval sought from the CIT on the reasons, as recorded by the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings, the entire initiation has been vitiated and become bad in law.
Leave a Reply