9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l raised by assessee are thus, allowed. - ITA Nos. 967 & 968/PUN/2016 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2018 - MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM For the Appellant : S/Shri Dharmesh Shah and Kulin Mehta For the Respondent : Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: Both the appeals filed by assessee are against separate orders of Pr.CIT(Central), Pune, both dated 30.03.2016 relating to assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 passed under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). 2. Both the appeals relating to the same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. However, in order to adjudicate the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artmental Representative for the Revenue placed reliance on the orders of authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. Briefly, in the facts of the case, search and seizure operations were carried out under section 132 of the Act on the Vascon group of cases on 05.06.2012 and the assessee was part of said group. Thereafter, notice under section 153A of the Act was issued. The Assessing Officer made certain enquiries and accepted returned income filed by the assessee. The said order was passed with the prior approval of the Addl.CIT, Central Range-2, Pune vide letter dated 23.03.2015. The Commissioner was of the view that the said assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act is e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the I.T. Act, 1961. It is also his submission that even on merit the Tribunal has decided both the issues in favour of the assessee. 14. We find merit in the above submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. We find the Lucknow Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mehtab Alam Vs. ACIT vide ITA Nos.288 to 294/Lkw/2014 order dated 18-11-2014 while deciding an identical issue has observed as under : 31. Besides other judgments were also referred by the assessee in this regard and we have also carefully examined the same and we find that similar views were expressed by various judicial authorities. 32. We have also examined the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar (supra) on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... getting approval of Addl. CIT under section 153Dof the I.T. Act and therefore such an assessment cannot be revised without revising the directions of the Addl. CIT under section 153D of the I.T. Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, has relied upon the decisions of this Tribunal in the case of Ch. Krishna Murthy vs. ACIT, C.C.3, Hyderabad in ITA.No.766/Hyd/2012 dated 13.02.2015 and also the decision of Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Mehtab Alam 288/Luck/2014 dated 18.11.2014 in support of this contention. He has also placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar in I.T. Appeal No. 192 of 2000 wherein it has been held that the assessment order approved by the Addl. CIT un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
