Supreme Court Condones Delay in S.151 Matter on Sanction for Notice in Terms of Judgment in Rajeev Bansal Case
The Apex Court reiterated the relevance of the guidelines laid down in Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajeev Bansal to ascertain the validity of the Sanction for Issue for Notice.
The Supreme Court of India recently condoned delays in the Income Tax Department’s appeal against the Bombay High Court’s quashing of reassessment notices issued to an Assessee, while calling on the Revenue to follow the guidelines laid down in Union of India & Ors. vs Rajeev Bansal (2024). The decision was given against a Special Leave Petition (Civil) (SLP) filed by the...
The Supreme Court of India recently condoned delays in the Income Tax Department’s appeal against the Bombay High Court’s quashing of reassessment notices issued to an Assessee, while calling on the Revenue to follow the guidelines laid down in Union of India & Ors. vs Rajeev Bansal (2024).
The decision was given against a Special Leave Petition (Civil) (SLP) filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. against Sangeeta Sailesh Bhoolabhai against the order passed by the Bombay High Court in Sangeeta Sailesh Bhoolabhai v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors.
GST Ready Referencer – Practical Guide for Professionals! Click here.
The issue pertains to the financials of the Assessee for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-2017 with regards to the obtaining of improper sanction.
Dharan V. Gandhi and Aanchal Vyas appearing for the Petitioner before the Bombay High Court submitted that the issue had been squarely covered by the same Court in Siemens Financial Services Private Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (2023) wherein the court held that for Assessment Year 2016-2017, the sanction should have been given under Section 151(ii) and not under Section 151(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and consequently the sanction is invalid.
If the sanction is deemed invalid, the notice shall be rendered invalid by default and shall be quashed; with the quashal being applicable towards the allied assessment order that had been passed on the basis of an invalid sanction.
Read More: ITAT Rules Reassessment Invalid for Non-Application of Mind in Approval Process u/s 15
In the present matter, S Dwarakanath, Rupesh Kumar, Raghav Sharma, Mukul Singh, A. Deepa, Rajat Vaishnaw and Raj Bahadur Yadav for the Revenue while Dharan Gandhi, Rajat Mittal and B. Vijayalakshmi Menon appeared for the Respondent-Assessee.
GST Compliance Calender from 1-03-2025 to 31-03-2026 Click Here
A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardimala and Justice R. Mahadevan condoned the delays in filing the case and proceeded to dispose of the petitions, noting that the matter was squarely governed by the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. vs. Rajeev Bansal” (Civil Appeal No.8629/2024 etc.).
Read More: Supreme Court & High Courts Weekly Round-up [March 29th to April 4th,2025]
In light of such observations, the Supreme Court directed that the Assessing Officers shall dispose of the objections in terms of the law laid down by the Court in the Rajeev Bansal judgment, while reaffirming that aggrieved parties may pursue the appellate remedies in law except for the issues which have already reached finality on the basis of the law.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
