9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 151 of the Act. Thus, we are of the firm opinion that the PCIT has failed to satisfactorily record its concurrence and by no stretch of imagination, the approval granted by common order, could be considered to be a valid approval. Hence we are of the view that the approval granted by PCIT for action under Section 147/148 of the Act is not valid. Consequently, the impugned notice issued u/s 148 and the proceedings emanating therefrom are set aside and quashed. Decided in favour of assessee. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Mr. Sumit Lalchandani Mr. Utkarsh Gupta, Advocates For the Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ms. Easha, Advs. JUDGMENT RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the writ petitioner with the following prayer:- A. Issue a writ of and/or order and or directions in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing impugned notice dated 30.03.2021 issued by Respondent No. l under Section 148 of the Act, order disposing off objections dated 15.02.2022 and proceedings initiated pursuant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner were disposed of by respondent No. 1 vide order dated 15.02.2022. 8. On 16.02.2022, respondent No. 3 issued notice under Section 142(1) of the Act, requiring the petitioner to submit the details. 9. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021 as wholly without jurisdiction, illegal, bad in law, barred by limitation and liable to be quashed, inter alia, on the following grounds:- a) impugned notice dated 30.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act for initiation of reassessment proceedings has been issued without there being any valid reasons to believe and on account of incorrect facts; b) the impugned notice has been issued without a valid sanction in terms of Section 151 of the Act as the approval granted by respondent No. 2 is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 10. The principal argument canvassed before us is with regard to the validity of the approval accorded in terms of Section 151 of the Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the approval has been granted mechanically without considering the facts of the case and the material on record as is evident from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the prescribed authority must be satisfied , on the reasons recorded by the AO, that it is a fit case for the issuance of such notice. Thus, the satisfaction of the prescribed authority is a sine qua non for a valid approval. 15. It is a trite law that the grant of approval/sanction is neither an empty formality nor a mechanical exercise. The Competent Authority must apply its mind independently on the basis of material placed before it before grant of approval/ sanction. 16. Perusal of the record reveals that the proforma for seeking approval was placed before the Principal Commissioner, Income Tax along with a note of reasons for re-opening of assessment under section 147 of the Act. The PCIT passed the following orders:- On careful perusal of information received, relevant details/evidences submitted and reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the cases from SL. No. 1 to 111 as listed in the annexures enclosed appear prima facie to be fit cases for action u/s 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 17. It is evident that the approval dated 28.03.2021 is in respect of 111 cases of reassessment. It is a general order of approval for all the 111 cases. There is not even a whisper as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en a view that merely rubber stamping of Yes would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - 19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case (1977) 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case where literally a mere stamp is affixed. It is signed by an Under Secretary underneath a stamped Yes against the column which queried as to whether the approval of the Board had been taken. Rubber stamping of underlying material is hardly a process which can get the imprimatur of this court as it suggests that the decision has been taken in a mechanical manner. Even if the reasoning set out by the Income-tax Officer was to be agreed upon, the least which is expected is that an appropri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 148. The important safeguards provided in Sections 147 and 151 were lightly treated by the Income Tax Officer as well as by the Commissioner. Both of them appear to have taken the duty imposed on them under those provisions as of little importance. They have substituted the form for the substance. 20. This Court, while following Chhugamal Rajpal in the case of Ess Adv. (Mauritius) S. N. C. Et Compagnie v. ACIT [2021 SCC OnLine Del 3613], wherein, while granting the approval, the ACIT This is fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of-has written the Income-tax Act, 1961. Approved , had held that the said approval would only amount to endorsement of language used in Section 151 of the Act and would not reflect any independent application of mind. Thus, the same was considered to be flawed in law. 21. The salient aspect which emerges out of the foregoing discussion is that the satisfaction arrived at by the prescribed authority under Section 151 of the Act must be clearly discernible from the expression used at the time of affixing its signature while according approval for reassessment under Section 148 of the Act. The said approval cannot be granted in a mechanica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
