https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465492 Whether assessments under s.153A were vitiated for want of valid approval under s.153D was the dominant issue. The ITAT held that the HC decision relied on did not lay down a binding rule that every irregular s.153D approval mandates annulment, applying the SC principle that precedents must be confined to issues actually decided. On facts, the Range Head could not be treated as having granted "mechanical" approval because CBDT guidelines required his involvement and he filed an affidavit rebutting non-application of mind; however, approvals were not granted assessee-wise and year-wise as required, rendering the s.153A orders defective. Applying SC and Tribunal authorities on curable procedural defects, the matters were remanded to the AO to obtain fresh lawful approvals; additional grounds were partly allowed. en-us Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 16:53:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465492 Whether assessments under s.153A were vitiated for want of valid approval under s.153D was the dominant issue. The ITAT held that the HC decision relied on did not lay down a binding rule that every irregular s.153D approval mandates annulment, applying the SC principle that precedents must be confined to issues actually decided. On facts, the Range Head could not be treated as having granted "mechanical" approval because CBDT guidelines required his involvement and he filed an affidavit rebutting non-application of mind; however, approvals were not granted assessee-wise and year-wise as required, rendering the s.153A orders defective. Applying SC and Tribunal authorities on curable procedural defects, the matters were remanded to the AO to obtain fresh lawful approvals; additional grounds were partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465492