9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d any interaction or directions of the Ld. Addl. CIT in the course of assessment either. There is no other material to show involvement of the superior authority in the course of assessment. In the first para of the approval memo, it is mentioned that draft assessment order has been received for approval and in the second para of the approval memo, it was stated that the draft assessment order has been approved. Nothing else is discernible. Such mechanical approval cannot be countenanced - the assessment order based on ritualistic approval stands vitiated and thus quashed. Assessee appeal allowed. - Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia, Accountant Member And Shri Vimal Kumar, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT-D.R. ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeals arises from the common search carried out under s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) in the case of connected assessees and involve common legal grounds in respective assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer tabulated hereunder: Sr. Nos. ITA Nos. CIT(A) Order dated Assessment Order dated Remarks 1. 3301/Del/2024 CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he factum of requisition for approval and receipt of approval from the Ld. Addl.CIT which culminated into impugned assessment orders under challenge. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the proceedings before the AO are quasi-judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such proceedings are expected to be observed without laxity before the results were determined. The Revenue Officer must realize that statutory duties conferred on them in the nature of a trust. They hold office as trustees of the public at large while dealing with the public and public money. Non-recording of relevant facts in the Order Sheet demonstrates the casualness on the part of the AO while discharging the onerous responsibility of framing search assessment. The order is expected to capsulate all events and incidents sequentially to guage the manner and process resulted in assessment. The Order Sheet does not provide any clue whatsoever as to whether the assessment records were sent to the Ld. Addl. CIT located in a different station. Observations and directions of the Ld. Addl. CIT if any, during the currency of ongoing assessment proceedings is also not discernible. The Order Sheet being stoic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iii) M3M India Holdings vs DCIT [2019] 71 ITR (Trib.) 451 (Del.) (iv) Vrushali Sanjay Shinde vs DCIT [2023] 154 taxmann.com 324 (Mum.-Trib.) (v) Sanjay Duggal vs ACIT [ITA No.1813/Del/2019] (vi) PCIT vs Anuj Bansal 466 ITR 254 251 (vii) PCIT vs Shiv Kumar Nayyar 467 ITR 186 (viii) PCIT vs Subhash Dabas (ITA No.243/2023) order dated 17.05.2024 (ix) Daze Construction Pvt.Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA Nos.594 to 598/Del/2023) order dated 30.09.2024 (x) Veena Singh vs ACIT (ITA No.294/Del/2022 for AY 2016-17) order dated 24.04.2024 (xi) PCIT vs Tirupati Buildings Officers Pvt.Ltd. (ITA No.447/2024) order dated 20.08.2024 9. The Ld.CIT DR, on the other hand, relied upon the approval granted under s. 153D of the Act and submitted that the Ld. Addl. CIT is not expected to give his own reasons for the approval. The approval once granted implies due application of mind to all relevant facts by the superior authority for the purposes of section 153D of the Act. 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions, material referred and case laws cited. The legal objection of transgression of requirement of approval under s. 153D of the Act is in question which has the effect on the very substratum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2021 addressed by the Ld. Addl. CIT to the AO, it emerges that the Ld. Addl.CIT has not uttered a word on the subject matter of additions. The approval is in the nature of Performa approval; the approval granted smacks of mechanical or perfunctory approval in a symbolic exercise of powers vested under s. 153D of the Act. 13. Significantly, the Hon ble Orissa High Court in the case of ACIT vs Serajuddin Co. 454 ITR 312 (Orissa) had an occasion to examine substantial question of law on the propriety of approval granted under s. 153D of the Act. The Orissa High Court made wide ranging observations towards the manner and legality of approval under s. 153D of the Act. The Hon ble High Court inter-alia observed that the approval under s. 153D of the Act being mandatory, while elaborate reasons need not be given, there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets the requirement of law. The approving authority is expected to indicate his thought process while granting approval, held that it is not correct on the part of the Revenue to contend that the approval itself is not justiciable. Where the Court finds that the approval is gra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
