TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 674
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch 'B' (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal") in ITA No.2483/Ahd/2014 and C.O. No.293/Ahd/2014, by proposing the following identically worded questions in both the appeals, stated to be substantial questions of law: "[A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in upholding the order of the CIT (A) deleting the addition of Rs. 90,00,000/- under section 68 of the Act? [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in holding the assessment order passed under section 143(3) consequent to an order under section 263, as invalid for want of approval under section 153D? [C] Whether on facts of the case and in law, the lack of approval under section 153D would invalidate the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the assessee's director, one Shri Riddhesh G. Bhandari, recorded under section 131 of the Act on 7.12.2009. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the appeal of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made under section 68 of the Act. Revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal and the assessee filed cross objection. By the impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and allowed the cross-objection. 4. Mr. M.R. Bhatt, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant in both the appeals, assailed the impugned order by reiterating the grounds stated in the assessment order. 5. Insofar as proposed question [A] and [D] are concerned, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring the course of search under section 131 of the Act, and which forms the basis for the impugned addition, was recorded much later on 7.12.2009. In the light of the above cited decision, it was not permissible for the Assessing Officer to make any addition under section 153A of the Act when no incriminating material had been found during the course of the search. 8. In the above view of the matter, the view adopted by the Tribunal being in consonance with the view taken by this court in the above referred decision, it cannot be said that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to give rise to a question of law. 9. As regards proposed questions [B] and [C] viz., whether lack of approval under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o them will invalidate the whole proceeding. In Vijay Narayan Thatte v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 9 SCC 92, the Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that when a statute is couched in negative language it is ordinarily regarded as peremptory and mandatory in nature. The Supreme Court, in some decisions has held that merely because a provision of law is couched in a negative language implying mandatory character, the same is not without exceptions. However, the present case deals with the interpretation of a taxing statute. It is well settled that a taxing statute has to strictly construed, therefore, from the language employed in section 153D of the Act, the requirement of obtaining the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner h....