9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... First we take up assessee's appeal (Parnika Commercial and Estate Pvt. Ltd.) in ITA No. 4494/Del/2024 for AY 2019-20 as the lead case and the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal :- "1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A),in Appeal No. CIT(A), Kanpur-4/11280/2018-19 has erred in passing order dtd. 29.07.2024 in contravention of provisions of S. 250 of the income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act"). 2. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of passing asst. order by illegally assuming jurisdiction u/s 153C and more-so when no material existed for assumption of valid jurisdiction u/s 153C and also when the satisfaction note does not satisfy the requirements of valid assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C. 3. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of passing asst. order even when the said order had been passed on the basis of illegal transfer order u/s 127. 4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ates. 8. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO in acquiring jurisdiction u/s 153C as such order is invalid and unlawful since the approval u/s 153D was without due application of mind and was merely ritualistic. 9. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of passing assessment order without having DIN. 10. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee mainly pressed Ground No. 2 of the grounds of appeal wherein assessee has raised the issue of approval granted under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') wherein approval granted u/s 153D was granted group approval. In this regard, he brought to our notice pages 317 & 318 of the paper book and he brought to our notice the letter drafted by the AO for seeking approval in the case of the assessee by invok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. However more particular, ld. AR drew our attention towards Hon'ble Allahabad High Court decision in the case of PCIT vs. Sidddarth Gupta (supra) wherein Hon'ble Court held that, "wherein approval u/s 153D was given for 123 cases through a single letter. On considering the above facts, court held that the approval granted u/s 153D is mechanical in nature and consequential impugned order is void-ab-initio. 10. Further we also find support from the decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of M/s Millenium Vinimay (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT, ITA No.458/Del/2022 dated 31.5.2024 and Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of PCIT vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar in ITA No. 285/2024 (Del), dated 15.05.2024 that the legal issue is in favour of the assessee. The relevant findings of the Coordinate Bench in the case of M/s Millenium Vinimay (P) Ltd. (supra) are reproduced as under:- "15. There are several decisions, which supports the view that approval granted by the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s 153D of the Act. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anting an approval for passing the order of assessment, had made following remarks : "To, The DCIT(OSD)1, Mumbai Subject: Approval u/s 153D of draft order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A in the case of Smt. Shreelekha Nandan Damani for A.Y. 2007-08 reg. Ref: No. DCIT (OSD)1/ CR7/Appr/2010-11 dt. 31.12.2010 As per this office letter dated 20.12.2010, the Assessing Officers were asked to submit the draft orders for approval u/s 153D on or before 24.12.2010. However, this draft order has been submitted on 31.12.2010. Hence there is no much time left to analyze the issue of draft order on merit. Therefore, the draft order is being approved as it is submitted. Approval to the above said draft order is granted u/s 153D of the I. T. Act, 1961." 7. In plain terms, the Additional CIT recorded that the draft order for approval under Section 153D of the Act was submitted only on 31st December, 2010. Hence, there was not enough time left to analyze the issues of draft order on merit. Therefore, the order was approved as it was submitted. Clearly, therefore, the Additional CIT for want of time could not examine the issues arising out of the draft order. His action of granting the approval was thus, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee. Thus the other Grounds raised in the Appeals of the Assessee in both the Appeals have rendered in- fructuous, which do not need any separate adjudication. 19. In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos. 294/Del/2022 and ITA No. 295/Del/2022 are allowed. 11. Upon considering the entire aspect of the matter, we find that the approval has been granted not separately for each assessment year for the assessee whereas the provision of Section 153D of the Act stipulates conditions that no order of assessment or reassessment shall be made by an Assessment Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section (1) of Section 153A of the Act or the assessment year referred to in Clause (b) of Sub Section 153B of the Act except the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner. It further appears from the approval dated 08.06.2018 that the same was a common and composite order whereas the Addl. Commissioner is required to verify and approve that each of assessment year is complied with as well as procedural laid down under the Act. Such fact clearly reveals non-application of mind on the part of the L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 21:34:51 that a letter dated 30.12.2018 was filed by the ld. AO before the ld. Addl. CIT seeking approval of draft assessment order u/s 153D of the Act. The ld. Addl. CIT has accorded approval for the said draft assessment orders on the very same day i.e., on 30.12.2018 for seven assessment years in the case of the assessee and for seven assessment years in the case of Smt. Neetu Nayyar. It is also pertinent in this regard to refer to pages 68 and 69 of the paper book which contains information obtained by Smt. Neetu Nayyar from Central Public Information Officer who is none other than the ld. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Range-S, New Delhi, under Right to Information Act, wherein, it reveals that the ld. Addl. CIT had granted approval for 43 cases on 30.12.2018 itself. This fact is not in dispute before us. Of these 43 cases, as evident from page 36 of the paper book which contains the approval u/s 153D, 14 cases pertained to the assessee herein and Smt. Neetu Nayyar. The remaining cases may belong to some other a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
