AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These Revenue’s and the assessee’s cross appeals ITA No. 2357/Del/2024 & ITA No. 2426/Del/2024, for Assessment Year 2019-20, arise against the CIT( A)-3, No ida’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2023-24/1063074819(1) dated 21.03.2024, in proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”), respectively.
Heard both the p arties at length. Case files peruse d.
It next transpire s during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity o f the impugned assessment herein framed by the learned DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad dated 29.09.2021 itself in furtherance to the search action dated 30.07.2018. T his is for the precise reason that the assessee has placed on record the learned Addl. CIT, Central Range, Meerut’s common section 153D approval dated 28.09.2021 befo re us involving not o nly the assessee namely Sh. Anand Prakash but also M/s C haru Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Smt. Anjali Gupta and M/s P S Enterpr ise s. He further quotes the tribunal’s recent order dated 12.08.2025 involving the above entity M/s P S Enterprises in ITA Nos.2918 to 2920/Del/2022 quashing section 153A assessment for the very reason of a common se ction 153D approval as under:
“3 . We have given our thought ful consider ation to t he assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective veheme nt contentions regar ding the first and foremost iss ue of validity of the i mpugned ass essments as lacki ng valid appr oval under section 153D of the Act. The ass essee has filed the l earned pres cribed aut hority’s comm on appro val dat ed 28.09.2021 granted in four different assessees’ cases. Va rious landmark precedents i. e. P CIT Vs . Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (Del .), PC IT Vs. Anuj Bansal (2024) 466 ITR 254 (SC ) and PCIT Vs. MDLR Ho tels (P.) L td. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) PCIT Vs. Shiv K umar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (Del. ) have alre ady set tled the issue i n ass essee’s favour and agai nst the departme nt that s uch an approval under s ec tion 153D has to be accorded s epara tely for e ach and every assessment years even if i t involves a singl e assessee. We t hus acc ept t he ass ess ee's i nstant firs t and for emos t legal grounds/arguments t o quash t he impugned assessment her ei n framed by the Assessi ng Offi cer on 29.09.2021 in very t erms. That bei ng the case, the assessee’s a ppeal s ITA Nos . 2918 to 2920/Del /2022 succ eed and R evenue’s appeal s ITA Nos. 15 to 17/Del/2023 fail in ve ry terms .”
All these clinching intervening developments have gone un-rebutted from the Revenue side. We make it clear that the learned CIT-DR has indeed taken pains to place on record comments dated 10.11.2025 of the ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad that section 153D approval exercise is indeed a detailed procedure involv ing elaborate discussio n at vario us levels. Be that as it may, we are of the co nsidered view that given the fact that this trib unal has q uashed already an identical assessment framed on the basis of the very approval, the assessee’s instant legal ground deserves to be accepted in above terms by adopting judicial consistency. We Order according ly.
All other remaining pleadings between the par ties stand rendered acade mic.
This Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 2357/Del/2024 is dismissed and the assessee’s cross appeal ITA No. 2426/Del/2024 is allowed, in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.