{"id":31475,"date":"2022-12-26T11:29:51","date_gmt":"2022-12-26T05:59:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/johnson-and-jonson-private-limited-v-dcit-bom-hcur\/"},"modified":"2022-12-30T13:21:15","modified_gmt":"2022-12-30T07:51:15","slug":"johnson-and-jonson-private-limited-v-dcit-bom-hcur","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/johnson-and-jonson-private-limited-v-dcit-bom-hcur\/","title":{"rendered":"Johnson and Jonson Private Limited v. DCIT  (2022) 213 DTR 340\/ 326 CTR 868(Bom.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Notice\u00a0 was\u00a0 under section 148 of the Act. The petitioner challenged the notice on the ground that the \u00a0\u00a0approval obtained for issuing notice u\/s 148 of the Act is not in accordance with the mandate of section 151 as the said approval is of Addl. CIT instead of PCI. The Court held that, since four years had expired from the end of the relevant assessment year, as provided under section 151(1) of the Act, it is only the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner who could have accorded the approval and not the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax. On this ground alone, they have to set aside the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. (WP. (L.) No.7733of 2022 dt. 4-5-2022\u00a0 2022) (AY 2015-16)<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/drive.google.com\/file\/d\/1gBql5iNFHYH9r4V16HzlXeLH9a7d59t6\/view?usp=share_link\"><strong>Johnson and Jonson Private Limited v. DCIT (Bom.)(HC)(UR)<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 151 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Sanction for issue of notice-Approval obtained for  issuing notice u\/s 148 of the Act is not in accordance with the mandate of section 151-Sanction  from Additional  Commissioner of Income-tax and not  from the PCIT-Notice issued is bad in law hence quashed. [S. 148,  Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, Art. 226]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31475","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-8bF","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31475","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31475"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31475\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":31568,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31475\/revisions\/31568"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}