AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed and after recording reason for initiation of reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee. 3. The ld DR drew our attention towards copy of the reasons recorded by the AO available at page No. 1 to 2 of the Assessee's paper book and submitted that the AO recorded detailed reasons before initiation of reassessment proceedings and also obtained approval of the competent authority as per requirement of provision of the Act. Therefore, the ld CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee without any basis and merely on the basis of hyper technical approach therefore, the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by dismissing the legal ground of appeal. 4. Replying to the above the ld AR drew our attention towards relevant para....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt paras from 4.4 to 4.6 of the order of the ld CIT(A) reads as follows:- "4.4 The second ground taken by appellant challenging the reassessment proceedings is that since the notice u/s 148 has been issued after the expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year, the satisfaction of JCIT is mandatory before the issuance of notice. As per appellant, the JCIT/Addl. CIT has merely approved the proposal of AO for issue of notice u/s 148, did not record his satisfaction, therefore, issuance of notice is invalid. I have gone through the issue raised by appellant. The statutory provisions of section 151(1) of the Act provide that the AO, below the rank of ACIT/DCIT, shall not issue notice u/s 148 unless the Joint Commissioner '....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved the proposal by stating "approved" and putting his signature. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble ITAT in the case ITO vs M.B. Jewelers (P) Ltd. vide order dated 14.11.2014 wherein Addl. CIT has simply recorded that he has granted approval and has not recorded his satisfaction as required under the law. In view of this, I hold that in the case of appellant also, issuance of notice u/s 151 of the Act is invalid for the reason that the Addl. CIT has not recorded his satisfaction as required under the law in the light of material relied upon by AO. He has simply affixed the words "approved" below the proposal of AO for Issuance of the notice u/s 151 of the Act which is contrary to the provisions of Section 151 of the Act and the opi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o, Hon'ble Court decided the issue against the Revenue on the ground that AO had not disposed of the objections raised by assessee as he was mandatorily required to do in terms of the decision is GKN Driveshaft (India) Ltd. Now in the light of these decisions, the facts in the case of appellant are to be examined. In its case, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 18.07.2012, in response to which, assessee filed a reply dated 24.08.2012 wherein it was mentioned that return already filed on 31.03.2008 vide Acknowledgement No. 265 be treated as having been filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, reasons recorded were supplied by AO to the appellant and she, vide letter dated 03.02.2014, filed objections to the reopening of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that the additional CIT(A) has mentioned a word "approved" on the proposal of the AO for issuance notice u/s 151 of the Act. He has not recorded his satisfaction towards reasons recorded by the AO therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd Vs. CIT 258 ITR 317 wherein, it was held that the power vested to the Commissioner/ Additional CIT as in the case of the present assessee to grant or not to grant approval is couple with a duty. Their lordship further observed that such duty cannot be exercised casually and in a routine manner and he has required to apply his mind to the proposal put up to him for approval in the light of the material relied upon the AO. The ld ....