9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1021X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was a mechanical exercise of power, therefore, cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the material on record. As the facts are admitted before us, the questions of law framed on the factual issues related to the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer are not open to agitate within the scope of the present appeals being in the nature of second appeal. No substantial question of law arises for consideration before us. Appeals are dismissed being devoid of merit. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 90 of 2022, 85 of 2022, 87 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 12-12-2022 - Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal And Hon'ble Chandra Kumar Rai JJ. For the Appellant : Gaurav Mahajan For the Respondent : Ashish Bansal ORDER These are Income Tax Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 filed by the Department-Revenue, against the order dated 7.10.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench 'A', Lucknow whereby the appeals filed by the assessee have been allowed quashing the assessment orders and the consequent orders of CIT (A). The dispute pertains to the assessment years 2013-14, 2015-16 and 2016-17, with regard to which three appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appears at Sr. No. 25. For assessment year 2015-16 and 2016-17, the Court was taken to the approval letter dated 31.12.2017 extracted in the order of the Tribunal wherein the name of the assessee appear at Sr. Nos. 29 and 30. It is demonstrated by the learned counsel for the assessee that as per these two approval letters, the Additional C.I.T. granted approval of draft assessment orders under Section 153D in 123 cases which included three cases of the present assessee. The Tribunal having taken note of the said undisputed facts, came to the conclusion that it was humanly impossible for the Approving Authority to peruse the material based on which, the draft assessment orders were passed. It was, thus, concluded that the Approving Authority granted approval under Section 153D of the Act in a mechanical manner which vitiated the entire proceedings. Reliance is placed on an earlier decision of the Tribunal in Navin Jain Others Vs. Deputy C.I.T., Central Circle-II, Kanpur in I.T.A. No. 639 to 641/Lkw/2019 passed on 03.08.2021. Assailing the orders passed by the Tribunal, it is argued by Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Advocate for the appellant-Revenue that the prior approval as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fect in the approval to the draft assessment orders granted by the competent Approving Authority. Learned counsel for the Assessee, however, defended the order of the tribunal for the reasoning given therein. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and having perused the order of the Tribunal, in view of the undisputed facts before us about the manner in which the approval to the draft assessment orders was granted under Section 153D for the assessment proceedings, by two letters dated 30.12.2017 and 31.12.2017, in 123 cases placed before the approving authority in two days, we are required to examine as to whether a substantial question of law arises for consideration before us so as to admit the present appeals. To answer the same, we are required to go through the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act. Section 132 provides the procedure for search and seizure operations in consequence of the information in possession of the Income Tax Authorities. Section 153A prescribes assessment in case of search or requisition. Section 153A provides that in the case of a person where a search is initiated under Section 132, the Assessing Officer shall is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egal and procedural requirements. There is an exhaustive discussion on the requirement of prior approval under Section 153D of the Act and it was noted that the requirement of approval cannot be treated as mere formality and the mandate of the Act that the Approving Authority has to act in a judicious manner by due application of mind in a manner of a quasi judicial authority, has been considered. It was held therein that if an approval has been granted by the Approving Authority in a mechanical manner without application of mind then the very purpose of obtaining approval under Section 153D of the Act and mandate of the enactment by the legislature will be defeated. For granting approval under Section 153D of the Act, the Approving Authority shall have to apply independent mind to the material on record for each assessment year in respect of each assessee separately. The words 'each assessment year' used in Section 153D and 153A have been considered to hold that effective and proper meaning has to be given so that underlying legislative intent as per scheme of assessment of Section 153A to 153D is fulfilled. It was held that the approval as contemplated under 153D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-built protection against arbitrary or unjust exercise of power by the Assessing Officer casts a very heavy duty on the said high ranking authority to see that the approval envisaged in the section is not turned into an empty ritual. The Apex Court has held therein that the approval must be granted only on the basis of material available on record and the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. The above discussion made in the judgement of Tribunal dated 3.08.2021 in the case of Navin Jain Vs. Dy. C.I.T. (Supra) has been relied by the Tribunal, in the instant case, to arrive at the conclusion that the mechanical approval under Section 153D of the Act would vitiate the entire proceedings in the instant case. For the reasoning given in the case of Navin Jain (Supra), as extracted in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, as noted above, there cannot be any two opinion to the requirement of prior approval of the Joint Commissioner to the draft assessment order prepared by the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
