ITAT Mumbai vide 2 separate orders passed by both members quashes reassessment proceedings for AY 2018-19 initiated in April,2022 on the ground that the sanction for issuing notices under sections 148A(d) and 148 was wrongly obtained from the PCIT instead of the PCCIT, as required under Section 151(ii) once more than three years had elapsed. Relying on binding Bombay High Court rulings in Vodafone India Ltd. and other decisions, as well as earlier coordinate-bench decisions in Davos International Fund and Asha P. Kedia, the Tribunal held that the proviso to Section 151 inserted from 2023 cannot apply retrospectively, and therefore the sanctioning authority cannot be PCIT for notices issued in April 2022 (beyond 3 years).

The contrary view of the coordinate bench in Albert Joseph Rozario was expressly distinguished on the grounds that (i) Section 149 extensions cannot be imported into Section 151 and (ii) that bench was not put to notice about coordinate bench precedents where the arguments of department were considered and recorded. (iii) there are binding precedents of High Court on the issue.

Accordingly, the sanction was invalid and the entire reassessment was annulled.