Held, that since the disputes pertained to the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18, the proviso to section 149(1) applied to the cases. As a consequence, the time limit specified in the preamended section 149(1)(b) was applicable and the time limit prescribed therein was four years and not more than six years. Clause (ii) of section 151 was applicable and, in terms thereof, the specified authorities were the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General. The orders under section 148A(d) were issued with the prior approval of the Commissioner (International Taxation). The validity of sanction for issuing the orders under section 148A(d) and the notices under section 148 should be tested with reference to amended section 151. If so tested, it was evident that sanction was not granted by an authority specified under clause (ii) of section 151. Hence, the orders under section 148A(d) and the notices under section 148 were liable to be quashed. As a corollary, the draft assessment orders under section 144B / 144C could not survive and had also to be quashed. Finance Act, 2021 ([2021] 432 ITR (St.) 52) (AY.2016-17, 2017-18)
Ramachandran Shivan v. ITO (2024)466 ITR 305 (Mad)(HC)
S. 148A : Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation-Amendment of Section 151 with effect from 1-4-2021-Issue of notice in respect Of Assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 notice is not valid-Interpretation of taxing statutes-Proviso. [S. 147, 148,149(1), 151, Art. 226]