9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 852X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, respectfully following the decision of N C Cables [ 2017 (1) TMI 1036 - DELHI HIGH COURT] we hold that the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 1095/Del/2021 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2023 - Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member And M.Balaganesh, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Sunil Kuamr Gupta, CA For the Revenue : Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed against the order CIT(A)-28, New Delhi dated 07.07.2020 for A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The grounds have been raised by the revenue are as follows:- 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation. The ld. AR, in all fairness, agreed to the said contention of ld. Senior DR. Keeping in view Covid 19 pandemic situation and order of Hon ble Supreme Court extending the period of limitation the appeal of the revenue is admitted for adjudication. 4. Ground no. 1 of revenue is general in nature. Apropos remaining ground no. 2 3 of revenue the ld. Senior DR, supporting the action of the Assessing Officer, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to take notice of the reason recorded wherein the then AO had mentioned amount of Rs. 4,43,84,844/- and while framing of reason, the AO had mentioned escapement of income at least of Rs. 1,00,000/- which has broader prospective. He further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded for initiation of proceedings available at pages 23 to 28 of first appellate order we note that while granting approval u/s. 151 of the Act the ld. PCIT only mentioned approved in column no 14 (at page 24 of paper book). As per judgment of Hon ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case CIT vs. N C Cables (supra) and judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime Chem Ltd. 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC), as also relied by the ld. AR and ld. CIT(A) while granting relief to the assessee, we have no hesitation to hold that the ld. PCIT has not recorded proper satisfaction and granted approval without application of mind in a mechanical manner which is not satisfying the mandatory requirement of provision of sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
