AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These twin assessee’s as many appeals IT A No s. 2368 & 2369/Del/2025, for Assessment Year 2009-10, ar ise against the CIT(A)-24, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1073412762(1) dated 18.02.2 025, in proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the p arties at length. Case files peruse d.
We next note that there arises the fir st and foremost issue o f validity of the impugned assessments framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 254 of the Act; dated 29.04.2024, in consequence to the search action herein dated 14.07 .2011 on the gro und that the learned prescribed authority had not accorded a valid approval thereto u/s 153D of the Act.
A combined perusal of the case records further indicates that the learned Assessing Officer had sought the prescribed authority’s co mbined section 153D approval involving to tal seven assessees which stood accepted on the very day dated 28.03.2014. We thus quote PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 163 taxmann.com 9 (De l.), PC IT Vs. MDLR Hotels (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 comb ined section 153D approval indeed vitiates the entire asse ssment itse lf to quash the impugned asse ssments framed in assessees’ cases. The Revenue ’s veheme nt arguments in support thereof stand declined in very terms.
All other pleadings o n merits here in stand rendered academic.
These tw in assessee’s appeals ITA No s. 2 368 & 2369/Del/2025 are allowed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.