2025 (8) TMI 1646

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short 'the Act'). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the order passed by the A.O., despite the same being initiated in violation of the statutory conditions of the Act and the procedure prescribed under the law and as such the same is bad in the eye of law and liable to be quashed. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the order passed by the A.O., des....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tural justice. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. The assessee, prop. of M/s. Kanika Herbals has e-filed his return of income for the AY 2016-17 on 17.10.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 4,43,800/- and the same was declared invalid by the CPC. Later on, it is seen that the assessee has furnished ITR for the year under consideration on 16.04.2018 without condonation of delay where income of Rs. 4,43,800/- and turnover of Rs. 2,95,86,240/- was declared. The assessee has not filed the form 3CA/3CD Tax audit report for the year under consideration despite the fact that turnover of Rs. 2,95,86,240/- was declared. During the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....was issued on 28-07-2022 after a period of three years from the end of o relevant assessment Year, the sanctioning authority should have been Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief commissioner but in this case the approval has been obtained from the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, which is not the competent authority to grant the permission. This issue is squarely covered by the Judgement of Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Communist Party of India (Maxist) V. CIT(Ex) WP 9031/2023 dated 28-04-2025 and the case of Sampark Management Consultancy LLP v. DCIT, Circle - 5(2) (1) Noida ITA NO. 6025 & 6026 /Del/2024 dated June 25, 2025. In the case of Sampark Management Consultancy LLP v. DCIT, C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fter expiry of three years from the end of relevant assessment years. Accordingly, sanction/ approval of Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General was required to be obtained. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal, 2024 (10) TMI 264 SUPREME COURT) and various decisions. Thus, the approval is not sustainable under law. The grounds as raised deserves to be sustained. Consequently, the appeals of the assessee are allowed." 6. The Ld. Sr. DR has relied the order of the lower authorities and submitted that the notice/ order was issued after taking the prior approval from the authority as per t....