HITRUST SERVICES CORP vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, HITRUST SERVICES CORP, has appealed against the assessment order dated 25.12.2024 passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The assessee challenged the validity of the reopening of the assessment on the ground that the mandatory approval from the Competent Authority as prescribed under section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not taken by the Assessing Officer. The assessee argued that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act was defective as it was issued after the elapse of more than three years from the relevant assessment year with the approval of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) instead of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT) or Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCIT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Validity of the approval u/s.151 of the Act for issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Virasat Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

• Ashish Jain vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• Arvindbhai Khatri Sons Designs Private Limited v/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

• M/s Sunglow Vinimay Private Limited Vs. Income Tax Officer

  D Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2014-15, 2015-16Allowed

• Heritage Lamps vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20Allowed

• M/s Galax Minerals (P) Ltd. (AY: 2017-18)

  B Bench, Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed