TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hary as lead case. 3. The assessee has taken the following revised and additional grounds of appeal :- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is bad, both in the eye of law and on the facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming an addition of Rs. 3,22,51,009/- on account of Bogus long term capital gain despite assessee fulfilling the burden cast on him. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 15,60,782/- on account of exempt income despite assessee fulfilling the burden cast on him. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 14,65,000/- on account of cash deposit in banks despite assessee fulfilling the burden cast on him u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4.1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition Rs. 14,65,000/- on account of cash deposit in bank account u/s 68 as pass book is not treate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same may be admitted in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. vs. CIT, (1998) 229 ITR 0383 (SC). 5. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue has no objection of admitting the additional grounds of appeal being purely legal issue. 6. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record by both the parties. We observed that the issues raised by the assessee in additional grounds go to the root of the matter challenging the jurisdictional issue. In the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC, Limited vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC), we are inclined to admit the additional grounds and take up the same for adjudication herein below. 7. First we take up legal issues raised by the assessee in the additional grounds of appeal. 8. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the approval taken by the lower authorities u/s 153D is mechanical and the approval for section 153D of the Act has to be separate for each assessment year and cannot be a common approval. He submitted that a common approval was taken in respect of 19 different assessees for different assessment years, hence the specified authority has not g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tral Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2598 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2598 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2598 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2598 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2598 5 Manoj Kumar Chaudhary 2010-11 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2011-12 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2012-13 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2619 6 Sh. Manoj Kumar Chaudhary (HUF) 2010-11 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2595 2011-12 29.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17-18/2614 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2614 10 Airwil Infra Ltd. 2012-13 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2615 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2615 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2615 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2615 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2615 11 R.D. Finlease Pvt. Ltd. 2010-11 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2011-12 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2012-13 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2625 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2594 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2594 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2594 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2594 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2594 19 WOW Dreambuild P Ltd 2010-11 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2011-12 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2012-13 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2013-14 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2014-15 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2015-16 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 2016-17 29.12.2017 29.12.2017 Jt. CIT/Central Range-Meerut/Approval-153D/2017-18/2612 Total 110 9. Ld. AR further submitted that if an approval has been granted by the Approving Authority in a mechanical manner without application of mind, then the very purpose ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iven in the assessment order. It is admitted by Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the appellant-revenue that the approval order is an administrative exercise of power on the part of the Approving Authority but it is sought to be submitted that mere fact that the approval was in existence on the date of the passing of the assessment order, it could not have been vitiated. This submission is found to be a fallacy, in as much as, the prior approval of superior authority means that it should appraise the material before it so as to appreciate on factual and legal aspects to ascertain that the entire material has been examined by the Assessing Authority before preparing the draft assessment order. It is trite in law that the approval must be granted only on the basis of material available on record and the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. The requirement of approval under Section 153D is pre-requisite to pass an order of assessment or re-assessment. Section 153D requires that the Assessing Officer shall obtain prior approval of the Joint Commissioner in respect of "each assessment year" referred to in Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....val for the said draft assessment orders on the very same day i.e., on 30.12.2018 for seven assessment years in the case of the assessee and for seven assessment years in the case of Smt. Neetu Nayyar. It is also pertinent in this regard to refer to pages 68 and 69 of the paper book which contains information obtained by Smt. Neetu Nayyar 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. Neetu Nayyar. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tified in holding that there was no 'application of mind' on the part of the Authority granting approval? 3. Brief facts are that the Tribunal by the impugned judgment set aside the order of the Assessing Officer passed under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) for Assessment Year 2007-08. This was on the ground that the mandatory statutory requirement of obtaining an approval of the concerned authority as flowing from Section 153D of the Act, before passing the order of assessment, was not complied with. 4. This was not a case where no approval was granted at all. However, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the approval granted by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax was without application of mind and, therefore, not a valid approval in the eye of law. Tribunal reproduced the observations made by the Additional CIT while granting approval and came to the conclusion that the same suffered from lack of application of mind. The Tribunal referred to various judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Courts in support of its conclusion that the approval whenever required under the law, must be preceded by application of mind and considera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t order, clearly this was a case in which the higher Authority had granted the approval without consideration of relevant issues. Question of validity of the approval goes to the root of the matter and could have been raised at any time. In the result, no question of law arises. 8. Accordingly, the Tax Appeal is dismissed." 16. In the case of ACIT, Circle-1 (2) Vs. Serajuddin and Co. the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Dairy No. 44989/2023 vide order dated 28/11/2023, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Department of Revenue against the order dated 15/03/2023 in ITA No. 43/2022 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, wherein the Hon'ble High Court had quashed the Assessment Order on the ground of inadequacy in procedure adopted for issuing approval u/s 153D of the Act by expressing discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority under section 153D of the Act. 17. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in preceding paras, we find considerable force in the arguments advanced by the Ld. the Assessee's Representative on the Additional Ground of Appeal. In our considered opinion the approval....