AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)-4, Kanpur’ s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2021–22/1034647100(1) dated 04.08.2021 , in proceedings u/s 143(3)/153A of the Income Tax Act , 1961 (in shor t “the Act”)
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
We next note that there arises the fir st and foremost issue of valid ity of the impugned assessments framed u/s 143(3)/153A of the Act; dated 29.12.2018, in consequence to the search action herein dated 03.11.2016 on the ground that the learned prescribed authority had no t accorded a valid approval there to u/s 153D of the Act.
It is in this factual backdrop that we admit the assessee’s instant legal ground and note with the able assistance co ming from both the parties that the learned Assessing Officer had sought the prescribed authority’s approval dated 29.12.2018. The clinching fact emanating from the approval letter is that the lear ned Assessing Officer herein had infact sought a common approval for four assessees for eight assessment years from 2011-12 to 2017-18 which stood granted, and therefore, we quote PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 163 taxmann.com 9 (Del.), PCIT Vs. MDLR H otels (P) Ltd . (2024) 166 taxmann.co m 327 (Del.) and ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. (2024) 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC), to conclude that such a combined se ction 153D approval indeed vitiates the entire assessment itself. We draw strong support therefrom to quash the imp ugned assessments framed herein in assessee’s case in assessment year 2016-17 in very terms.
All other pleadings o n merits here in stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.