TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 553
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Subsequently, six hearing notices were issued through RPAD but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Further we noticed that no counsel was appointed till date. Therefore, the above details show that assessee is not interested to proceed with the case. Considering the above facts on record, we proceeded to hear the case with the assistance of ld. DR of the Revenue. 4. We take up assessee's appeal in ITA No.1326/Del/2023 for AY 2012-13 as lead case as per which brief facts of the case are, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') was conducted on 23.07.2015 and subsequent dates in different business and residential premises of Deepak Agarwal, Mukesh Kumar and others, group of cases based at Delhi. It was found by the Investigation Wing that a group of entry operators were providing accommodation entries to beneficiaries. They found various incriminating papers/documents and seized during the abovesaid search and seizure operation in the group of cases, as per the statements recorded during the course of search and post-search proceedings, it was found that the group was involved in providing accommodation entries. The AO observed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act being mechanical and, invalid approval having been granted without due application of mind to the facts of the appellant and provision of law and therefore, order of assessment is invalid and deserves to be quashed." In support of this appellant has submitted that "It is submitted that from perusal of section 153D of the Act, it is evident that it provides for approval of learned Additional Commissioner for each assessment year referred to section 153C of the Act It is submitted that learned Joint Commissioner therefore required to verified and approved that each of assessment year is complies with law as well as procedure laid down under the Act. It is submitted that, for each unabated and abated assessments, the learned Assessing Officer and the Approving Authority [Additional CIT] shall have to verify the incriminating material found during the course of search or the seized material if pertain to the same assessment year and its basis. It is therefore submitted that, for granting approval under section 153D of the Act, the Approving Authority shall have to verify and consider each assessment year and shall have to apply independent mind to the material on record to see wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssment order is to be sent to Additional CIT for obtaining prior approval u/s 153D of the Act The seized material etc. along with appraisal report are also to be provided to the Add!, CIT having jurisdiction over the case. Thereafter, the Addl. CIT first examines the seized material, applies his mind and then after going through the draft assessment order, he issues approval u/s 153D of the Act to pass the assessment order through his letter sent to AO. In this process, the assessee company is not called for by the Addl. CIT because it is a departmental internal administrative matter. In view of the facts stated above it cannot be said that no valid approval had been obtained u/s 153D of the Act, for passing original assessment order u/s l53C of the Act. Also, it cannot be said that the assessment made u/s 153C is invalid and not in accordance with law. It can also not be said that the Addl. CIT has granted approval u/s 153D without due application of his mind. A copy of order of approval u/s 153D of the Act granted by the Addl. CIT vide his letter dated 24.12.2018 is also enclosed herewith. It is also important to submit that there is no bar in the Income Tax Act to pass a common ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lete knowledge of the facts of the cases since the matters are time barring and he/ she regularly interact with the Assessing Officers to get hold of the progress in the cases which he/ she has to approve. The final show cause notice and draft assessment order are also prepared by the AO in consultation of the Joint./ Addl. Commissioner. It appears that the AO has followed the CBDT guidelines stated in above para (8.2) and the due procedure was followed during block assessment proceedings by AO and Range Head and there was no mechanical procedure adopted. From the remand report submitted by the AO it is found that the AO had submitted questionnaire on 04.10.2018 which got approved on 27.10.2018. Further, the AO also submitted that draft assessment order for approval before the Jt./ Addl. Commissioner which was approved as per provision U/s 153D of the IT Act. The appellant cannot say that there was no application of mind just by seeing the approval letter of the Jt./ Addl. Commissioner. It is a well-known fact that AO & Jt./ Addl. Commissioner have to keep interacting regularly and discuss the cases which are being time barred in near future. Many a times, assessee just keep delayi....