TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 379
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in absence of any incriminating evidence, thus making the impugned addition void-ab-initio. 4. That the Ld. lower authorities have failed to appreciate or appraise the evidences and arguments submitted by the assessee to discharge its burden under section 68. 5. That the Ld. lower authorities have erred in law and in fact by relying on irrelevant and factually incorrect 'evidences without providing the appellant an opportunity to cross-examine or rebut the same in complete violation of Principle of natural justice. 6: That the Ld. lower authorities have passed the orders sans of any jurisdiction when the source of credit has already been assessed by the jurisdiction assessing officer. 7. That the orders passed by both the Ld. assessing officer and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is highly mechanical in nature and without application of mind relying on statements/evidences not related to the impugned case. 8. That the assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground before or at the time of hearing. 3. Similarly, the assessee has raised following grounds for A.Y.2017-2018 as under :- 1. That the Ld. lower author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. JCIT in a mechanical manner on presumptive basis. 2. The Ld. assessing officer has clearly erred in complying with requirements of section 153A by passing a consolidated order for all the six assessment years in place of passing separate orders for "each assessment year. 5. Ld. AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC), reported in 229 ITR 383 and submitted that the additional ground may be taken on record and the both the appeals of the assessee may be decided on the additional ground raised. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee derives income from business/profession. A search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act was conducted on the Factory and office premises of the assessee on 17.01.2017. Consequently, notices u/s.153A of the Act were issued for A.Y.2016-2017 & 2017-2018. In response to the notice, the assessee filed returns for the above assessment years. In response to the notices issued u/s.143(2) & 142(1) of the Act, the assessee furnished its written submissions and supporting documents. During the search proceedings, copy of seized material and accounts, as liste....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry opportunity has been given to the assessee and all the records, evidences and materials have been thoroughly verified. The JCIT granted bulk approval of 95 assessment orders which clearly defeats the intent and purpose behind insertion of section 153D brought in the statute by the Finance Act, 2007. 24.We find that the ld. JCIT while granting approval, presumed that Assessing Officer has given proper hearing to the assessee and thoroughly verified seized material and there are no adverse findings, satisfied himself that all the issues emanating from the records have been verified and additions wherever required have been proposed. We further find that there is no independent application of mind on the part of ld.JCIT while granting the approval. 25.We find that coordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal while considering the similar ground of appeal in granting bulk approval of the assessment under section 153A, in case of Arch Pharmalabs Ltd Vs ACIT (supra) held that the approval accorded under section 153D is without any occasion to refer to the assessment records and seized material, if any, incriminating the assessee and hence such approval is in the realm of an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e contention of ld CIT-DR that the assessment under section 153A is passed under the supervision of JCIT and that JCIT granted approval of the draft assessment after considering the material placed before him. We do not find any such satisfaction in the approval order that draft assessment after considering the material placed before him, rather the ld JCIT recorded that it is presumed that the AO granted proper opportunity to the assessee etc... 28.In view, of aforesaid discussion and respectfully following the decisions of coordinate benches in Sanjay Duggal & others (supra) and Archpharma Labs & Acrh Impex P Ltd (supra), we find convincing force in the submissions of the assessee that the approval granted by JCIT suffer from non-application of mind and depends on presumption of proper performance of duty by A.O. such per functionary approval under section 153D cannot termed as legitimate. The consequential assessment orders based on non-est approval under section 153D, thus are void-abinitio on this ground alone. Considering the facts that we have allowed the appeal on the legal issues therefore, consideration of appeal on merit have become academic. 10. Accordingly,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iction - Whether mere fact that Additional Commissioner did not record his satisfaction would not render invalid, sanction granted under section 151(2), when reasons on basis of which sanction was sought for could not be assailed - Held, yes [Para 22] [In favour of revenue]" 13. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. 14. The contention of the revenue by placing the judgments of the Jurisdictional High Court of Chattishgarh and Calcutta High Court were examined and our observations are as under: 15. The judgment in the case of Bharat Krishi Kendra Vs Union of India (supra) was decided in favour of the revenue only on the reason that where "Joint Commissioner recorded satisfaction on proposal of Assessing Officer by mentioning that it is a fit case for issuance of notice, approval under section 151 giving details of approving authority as Principal Commissioner in itself will not make approval invalid", this is altogether on different footing then the facts of the present case, where approval was granted by the Ld JCIT himself but on the basis of certain presumptions without verifying the seized material by himself, even the re....