The Petitioner challenged the show cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act, order under section 148A(d) of the Act and the notice under section 148 of the Act on the ground that there was total non-application of mind by the superior authorities in granting the approval before issuance of the impugned re-opening notice. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court accepted the submission of the Petitioner and observed that the application for approval, recommendation and the grant of approval have all been made by the officers mechanically and without application of mind. Further, on the issue of personal hearing not being granted, the Hon’ble Court observed that in every case, before passing an order under section 148A(d) of the Act, the Respondents shall give a personal hearing if requested for by the Petitioner. Accordingly, the impugned notices/orders were quashed and set aside. (AY. 2019-20)
Nikhil Chandrakant Dharia v. ITO [2024] 469 ITR 262 /151 taxmann.com 117 (Bom) (HC)
S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Before passing order under S. 148A(d) the Officer ought to give a personal hearing if requested for by the assessee-Grant of approval by PCIT without application of mind to the form of approval-Order and notice liable to be set aside. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d),149(1)(b), 151 Art. 226].