TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....153A(1)(b) of the Act by making various additions. Aggrieved by the said assessment orders, the Assessee preferred Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide combined order dated 27/01/2023, sustained the additions made by the A.O. As against the consolidated order of the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2013-14, the Assessee preferred the captioned Appeals. 3. The Assessee has filed the additional grounds of Appeal and contended that the assessment orders have been passed consequent to the erroneous approval granted u/s 153D of the Act, therefore, the assessment orders passed for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2013-14 requires to be quashed. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee further submitted that the approval accorded u/s 153D of the Act is a mechanical and arbitrary approval without their being any application of mind and also without satisfying the statutory pre-conditions of the Act as such the assessment so framed is null and void. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that single approval has been issued u/s 153D of the Act for seven Assessment Years pertaining to the Assessee, apart from the same, on the very same day the Ld. JCIT has accorded approval for 147 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dabad), in the above-captioned appeal, sought approval from the Range Head, vide his office letter being F.No. DCIT/CCI/Faridabad/2017-18/1807, dated 21/12/2017, and have also sent the draft assessment order along with relevant assessment records, in respect of M/s Sohan Lal Singla (AOP) [PAN: AADAS1739E) (MAPSKO Group of Cases), for the kind consideration and approval of the Range Head in terms of S. 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. [A copy of AO's letter requesting approval u/s 153D dated 21/12/2017 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-A]. 4) Furthermore, the Range Head (Jt. CIT, Central Range, Gurgaon) after perusing the draft assessment order along with relevant assessment records, accorded the approval u/s 153D of the Act vide his office letter being F.No. JCIT(CR)/GGN/2017-18/959, dated 22/12/2017. 5) Furthermore, it is pertinent to mention here that the AO requested approval u/s 153D of the Act on 21/12/2017 whereas the Range Head granted the said approval only on 22/12/2017. It may please further be noted that there are only 4 issues and most of these are common to all the assessment years under consideration for which the additions were made by the assessing officer.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th the same modus operandi and cases pertaining to the same assessee, it would not be unreasonable to presume that the approving authority can judiciously apply its independent mind to such cases in a single day. Thus, the Range head approving all or a number of cases of an assessee on a single day ought not to be seen as non-application of mind, particularly when the Range Head has perused the records and engaged in discussions with the Assessing Officer from time to time as per the CBDT guidelines referred above. 8) Furthermore, it is respectfully submitted that the Assessee's contention that Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 mandates separate approval for each assessment year is not only erroneous but also wholly unsupported by the provisions of the Act. Section 153D expressly requires the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner before the Assessing Officer passes any assessment or reassessment order under sections 153A or 153C, in cases involving search or requisition. However, the approval mandated under this provision is for the entire set of assessments arising from the search or requisition, encompassing all relevant years as a whole. The phrase "each asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a approval; the approval granted smacks of mechanical or perfunctory approval in a symbolic exercise of powers vested under s. 153D of the Act. Apart from the same, a single approval has been granted for seven Assessment Years pertaining to the Assessee. 9. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (supra) held as under:- "11. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision evinces an uncontrived position of law that the approval under Section 153D of the Act has to be granted for "each assessment year" referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 153A of the Act. It is beneficial to refer to the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the case of PCIT v. Sapna Gupta [2022 SCC Online All 1294] which captures with precision the scope of the concerned provision and more significantly, the import of the phrase- "each assessment year" used in the language of Section 153D of the Act. The relevant paragraphs of the said decision are reproduced as under:- "13. It was held therein that if an approval has been granted by the Approving Authority in a mechanical manner without application of mind then....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sition of law on the issue at hand. Paragraph no.22 of the said decision reads as under:- "22. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the assessee there is not even a token mention of the draft orders having been perused by the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax. The letter simply grants an approval. In other words, even the bare minimum requirement of the approving authority having to indicate what the thought process involved was is missing in the aforementioned approval order. While elaborate reasons This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 21:34:51 need not be given, there has to be some indication that the approving authority has examined the draft orders and finds that it meets the requirement of the law. As explained in the above cases, the mere repeating of the words of the statute, or mere "rubber stamping" of the letter seeking sanction by using similar words like "seen" or "approved" will not satisfy the requirement of the law. This is where the Technical Manual of Office Procedure b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is regard to refer to pages 68 and 69 of the paper book which contains information obtained by Smt. NeetuNayyar from Central Public Information Officer who is none other than the ld. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Range-S, New Delhi, under Right to Information Act, wherein, it reveals that the ld. Addl. CIT had granted approval for 43 cases on 30.12.2018 itself. This fact is not in dispute before us. Of these 43 cases, as evident from page 36 of the paper book which contains the approval u/s 153D, 14 cases pertained to the assessee herein and Smt. NeetuNayyar. The remaining cases may belong to some other assessees, which information is not available before us. In any event, whether it is humanly possible for an approving authority like ld. Addl. CIT to grant judicious approval u/s 153D of the Act for 43 cases on a single day is the subject matter of dispute before us. Further, section 153D provides that approval has to be granted for each of the assessment year whereas, in the instant case, the ld. Addl. CIT has granted a single approval for all assessment years put together." 17. Notably, the order of approval dated 30.12.2020 which was produced before us by the lear....