AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM:
This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-31, New Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 14.01.2026 for the Assessment Year 2015-16 raising following grounds of appeal :-
“1.Whether Ld, CIT(A) was right in concurring the decision of Hon’ble ITAT in holding approval accorded by JCIT / Addl. CIT u/s 153D as defective even though there is no finding regarding perversity or illegality in the assessment order?
2.Whether Ld, C1T(A) was right in concurring the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in annulling the assessment order made in accordance with the provision of I.T. Act, on the ground that JCIT/ Addl. CIT has made a combined order u/s 153D without appreciating the facts that the approval is only mandatory &, the law never prescribed a specific procedure?
3.Whether Ld. CIT(A) was right in concurring the decision of Hon’ble ITAT in annulling the assessment order by ignoring the facts that JCIT / Addl. CIT actively supervising assessment and exceeding its jurisdiction by questioning the process?
4.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was right in concurring the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in quashing the approval granted u/s l53D by the Range Head and order u/s 153A r.w.s. 14:3(3) of the Act passed on 31.12.2018 without going into the merits of the case.
5.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) was correct in concurring the decision of Hon’ble ITAT in holding that the Approving Authority has not applied his mind for giving approval under Section 153D.”
At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee with the permission of the Bench brought to our notice relevant facts on record. He submitted that ld. CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee on the issue of common approval granted u/s 153D of the Act by observing as under :-
“8.On examination of the issue, it is noticed that the assessments for A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2016-17 have been framed pursuant to a common approval granted u/s 153D of the Act. An identical issue relating to the validity of such consolidated approval u/s 153D (which included approval for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 also) has already been adjudicated by the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own case for earlier assessment years. The Hon'ble ITAT, vide order dated 29.02.2025, has categorically held that such approval is not sustainable in law and consequently quashed the assessments framed thereunder. Since the consolidated approval which was subject matter of appeal before Hon'ble ITAT included approval for AY 2015-16 and 2016-17, I find that the decision of Hon'ble ITAT is squarely applicable in these appeals.
9.It is seen that the same- approval u/s 153D covers the assessment years under consideration, i.e. A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2016-17. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the appellant's own case, I am of the considered view that the assessment orders dated 31.12.2018 passed u/s 153A of the Act for both the assessment years are liable to be annulled for want of a valid approval u/s 153D of the Act. I hold accordingly. Hence, the assessment orders in question are hereby annulled.
10.Since the assessments are annulled as above on jurisdictional grounds, the other grounds raised by the appellant on merits become academic in nature and are therefore not being adjudicated upon in this order.”
Accordingly, he submitted that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly quashed the assessment orders and pleaded that the appeal filed by the Revenue be dismissed.
On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below but he has not been able to controvert that the approval is a consolidated one.
Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed from the order of ld. CIT (A) that the assessment for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 have been framed pursuant to a common approval granted u/s 153D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). Further we observed that coordinate Bench in a batch of eight cases involving three assessees, namely, Mr. Manish Sharda, Ms. Mamta And Ms. Rakhi Sharda, on the similar issue allowed the appeals by quashing the assessments vide order dated 30.04.2025 by relying on various judgments of Hon’ble Courts, and held as under :-
“2.Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
3.It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessments itself as the learned prescribed authority herein had accorded its combined approval u/s 148B dated 09.06.2023 for six assessment years involving these three assessees, which has already been held as not sustainable going by PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 163 taxman.com 9 (Del), PCIT Vs. MDLF Hotels (P.) Ltd. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) and ACIT Vs. Serajuddin and Co. (2024) 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC).
4.That being the case, I adopt the judicial consistency to quash all these assessments framed on 24.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 in all these assessee’s appeals pertaining to assessment years 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively.
5.All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. These three assessees’ eight respective appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.”
Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we are inclined not to disturb the findings of the ld. CIT (A) and accordingly, dismissed the grounds raised by the Revenue.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.