ITAT Delhi Quashes Reassessment for Invalid Section 151 Approval in Case of Reshma Harbakhsh Singh Vs DCIT

Background and Context

In the case of Reshma Harbakhsh Singh Vs DCIT, the Delhi Bench of the ITAT set aside a reassessment framed for AY 2018-19 under Section 147 / Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The Tribunal held that the very initiation of reassessment proceedings was void because the mandatory prior approval required under Section 151 had been obtained from an authority not empowered to grant such sanction in the post-01.04.2021 legal framework.

The ITAT relied squarely on the binding decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC), which clarified that proper approval under Section 151 is a jurisdictional condition precedent, not a mere procedural formality. Non-compliance with this statutory requirement renders the notice under Section 148 and all ensuing proceedings invalid and without jurisdiction.

This order has significant implications for reassessment proceedings initiated after 01.04.2021 where the time elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year exceeds three years.

Appeal Before ITAT: Basic Facts

Parties and Assessment Year

  • Assessee: Late Reshma Harbakhsh Singh (represented by legal heir)
  • Respondent: DCIT
  • Assessment Year: 2018-19
  • Forum: ITAT Delhi Bench
  • Order under appeal: Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre [“Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”] dated 31.08.2025 under Section 250

Origin of Reassessment

  1. The assessee did not file a return of income for AY 2018-19.
  2. The Income Tax Department received information about a sale of immovable property attributable to the assessee.
  3. Based on this information, the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated action for reassessment.
  4. A notice under Section 148 was issued on 04.04.2022, purportedly after obtaining prior approval from the PCIT, Delhi-10.
  5. The AO completed assessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 read with Section 144B on 19.02.2024, determining total income at Rs. 1,81,40,049/-.
  6. The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC upheld the reassessment and the additions vide order dated 31.08.2025.

Grounds of Appeal Before ITAT

The assessee’s legal heir challenged the reassessment order on multiple grounds, both legal and factual. The key grounds included:

  • The reassessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144 was claimed to be illegal, bad in law, and void ab initio.
  • It was contended that no proper and speaking order was passed under Section 148A(d).
  • The notice under Section 148 was alleged to be without jurisdiction, time-barred, and void ab initio.
  • Crucially, Ground No. 4 assailed the validity of approval under Section 151, asserting that the sanctioning authority lacked competence under the amended law.
  • Additional grounds challenged:
    • The legality of notice under Section 148A(b).
    • Additions of Rs. 1,80,00,000/- and Rs. 1,40,049/-.
    • Violation of principles of natural justice.
    • Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c).

Recognising that the jurisdictional challenge to Section 151 approval could potentially render the entire reassessment void, the Tribunal decided to first adjudicate Ground No. 4 regarding the validity of sanction.

Statutory Position Post 01.04.2021