Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 478 - HC - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - valid approval u/s 151 - “unsigned approval” issued in electronic form - Valid Satisfaction noted by Prescribed Authority under section 151 - Whether an unsigned content in an electronic record said to be pushed through electronic mode at a particular point of time, can be said to be a valid satisfaction of the PCIT under Section 151 for assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to issue jurisdictional notice to an assessee under Section 148 of the Act, 1961? - HELD THAT:- The expression “shall be signed” used in Section 282A(1) of the Act 1961 makes the signing of the notice or other document by that authority a mandatory requirement. It is not a ministerial act or an empty formality which can be dispensed with. “Signed” means to sign one’s name; to signify assent or adhesion to by signing one’s name; to attest by signing or when a person is unable to write his name then affixation of “mark” by such person. The document must be signed or mark must be affixed in such a way as to make it appear that the person signing it or affixing his mark is the author of it. Therefore, a notice or other document as referred in Section 282A (1) of the Act, 1961 will take legal effect only after it is signed by that Income Tax Authority, whether physically or digitally. The usage of the word “shall” make it a mandatory requirement. In the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha and others [1971 (1) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT] Hon’ble Supreme Court considered the validity of recording satisfaction under Section 151 by the Commissioner for the purposes of issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. In the present set of facts there was no valid satisfaction recorded by the by the Prescribed Authority under section 151 of the Act, 1961 when the AO issued notice to the assessees under section 148 of the Act, 1961. At the time when the notice under section 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer to the petitioner there was no valid satisfaction recorded by the Prescribed Authority i.e. the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. Subsequent to issuance of the notice under section 148 by the Assessing Officer, the satisfaction under section 151 was digitally signed by the Prescribed Authority. The point of time when the AO issued notices u/s 148, he was having no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notices under section 148 of the Act, 1961. Consequently the impugned notices issued by the AO u/s 148 were without jurisdiction. The questions no. (a) and (b) are answered accordingly. There was no valid satisfaction under section 151, therefore, the question whether Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Income Tax for the purposes of recording of satisfaction under section 151 is a designated Income Tax Authority under section 282 A of the Act 1961, is left open.
|