2015 (5) TMI 217
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Lal, counsel For The Respondent : Shri L.L. Sharma, counsel JUDGMENT As common questions of law and fact are involved in all these appeals filed under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), all the appeals are being decided by this common order. 2- Challenge in all these appeals are made to concurrent orders passed by the Commissioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Appellate Authority found that the reason recorded by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, for according sanction, it only stated that 'I am Satisfied'. As this action for sanction was without application of mind and as this was done in a mechanical manner, following the law laid down in the case of Arjun Singh Vs. Assistant Director of Income T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CCH 273 [Guj HC]; and, the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - I, New Delhi Vs. Vatika Township (P) Limited, (SC) 2014 ITL 833, Shri Sanjay Lal - learned counsel for the appellants, prays for interference into the matter. 6- However, Shri L.L. Sharma - learned counsel for the respondents, placed reliance on another judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e his statutory obligation properly in the matter of recording sanction as he merely wrote on the format "Yes, I am satisfied" which indicates as if he was to sign only on the dotted line. Even otherwise also, the exercise is shown to have been performed in less than 24 hours of time which also goes to indicate that the Commissioner did not apply his mind at all while granting sanction. The satisf....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI