AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:
This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Dehradun’s order dated 18.02.2015 passed in case no. 570A/CIT(A)/DDN/13-14, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset that there arises the first and foremost legal issue of validity of the impugned section 143(3) assessment framed on 30.01.2014 in assessment 2012-13 for want of a valid approval under section 153D of the Act.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective vehement contentions regarding the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessments as lacking valid approval under section 153D of the Act. The learned prescribed authority’s common approval dated 30.01.2014 granted in five different assessees cases for assessment years 2006-07 to 2012-13 forms part of the case records. Various landmark precedents i.e. PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (Del.), PCIT Vs. Anuj Bansal (2024) 466 ITR 254 (SC) and PCIT Vs. MDLR Hotels (P.) Ltd. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) have already settled the issue in assessee’s favour and against the department that such an approval involving mere mechanical exercise involving multiple assessees u/s 153D is a non-est one only. We thus accept the instant first and foremost legal grounds/arguments in assessee’s favour to quash the impugned assessment herein framed by the Assessing Officer on 30.01.2014 in assessment year 2012-13 in very terms.
All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic.
This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.