TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1873
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inst respective orders passed under section 263 / 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. Out of this bunch of appeals, five appeals relate to one assessee and two appeals relate to separate assessee. 3. The issue raised in this bunch of appeals is similar, hence they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. However, in order to adjudicate the issue, we make reference to the facts and issue in ITA No.637/PUN/2018, relating to assessment year 2009-10. 4. The assessee in ITA No.637/PUN/2018, relating to assessment year 2009-10 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The learned PCIT erred in law and on facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Real Estate and the office premises of assessee was covered. During the course of search operations, cash of Rs. 3,05,080/- was found and seized. The assessee had originally filed return of income on 19.08.2009 declaring income of Rs. 43,73,420/-. Thereafter, case of assessee was taken up for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer verified seized material and after examination, certain queries were raised, which were replied upon by the assessee and assessment of assessee was completed and returned income was accepted. Order was passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer while passing order clearly records that This order is passed with the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-2, P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, arose before the Tribunal in bunch of appeals in the case of Dhariwal Industries Limited Vs. CIT (supra). The Tribunal vide order dated 23.12.2016 observed as under:- "12. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the Ld.CIT and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case for all the six assessment years has passed the order u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3) after obtaining approval of the Addl.CIT u/s.153D of the I.T. Act. We find the Ld.CIT invoked his revisional powers u/s.263 of the I.T. Act on the ground that the order passed by the Assessing Officer for all the yea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd that is why he got necessary approval of the Addl. CIT before completing the assessment orders for all the assessment years and once that is not disputed by the Revenue, then the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax would not be justified in interfering in the approval according by the Addl. CIT for framing the assessment order and thus there was no case for setting aside the assessment order for the assessment years in question." 14.1 We find the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CH. Krishna Murthy Vs. ACIT vide ITA No.766/Hyd/2012 order dated 13- 02-2015 following the decision of the Lucknow Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mehtab Alam (Supra) held that CIT(A) is not justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s.263 when t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the I.T. Act is not sustainable. Accordingly, we allow the grounds of the assessee." 15. Since in the instant case also the Assessing Officer has passed the order after obtaining necessary approval from Addl.CIT u/s.153D of the I.T. Act, therefore, respectfully following the above-mentioned decisions of the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal we are of the considered opinion that the CIT has no power to revise the order u/s.263 of the I.T. Act in the instant case since the same has been passed with the approval of the Addl.CIT u/s.153D of the I.T. Act." 9. The issue arising before us is identical to the issue before the Tribunal and following the same parity of reasoning, we hold that where the Assessing Officer had passed th....