TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 1495
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on shall stand disposed of. ITA 197/2024 1. This appeal impugns the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] dated 18 July 2023 and has framed the following questions of law for our consideration:- 3.1 Whether the Ld. ITAT has failed to notice the distinction between administrative approval versus appellate power? 3.2 Whether the Ld. ITAT failed to notice the legal position that administrative decisions are non-justiciable, only judicial /quasijudicial decisions are justiciable? 3.3 Whether the Ld. ITAT failed to notice the fact that the respondent assessee had never filed objection during the course of assessment proceedings? 3.4 Whether on the facts and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT failed to appreciate the bogus nature of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- "151. Sanction for issue of notice.-(1) No notice shall be issued under Section 148 by an Assessing Officer, after the expiry of a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is satisfied, on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice. (2) In a case other than a case falling under subsection (1), no notice shall be issued under Section 148 by an Assessing Officer, who is below the rank of Joint Commissioner, unless the Joint Commissioner is satisfied, on the reasons recorded by such Assessing Officer, that it is a fit case for the issue of such notice. (3) F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expression "approved" says nothing. It is not as if the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has to record elaborate reasons for agreeing with the noting put up. At the same time, satisfaction has to be recorded of the given case which can be reflected in the briefest possible manner. In the present case, the exercise appears to have been ritualistic and formal rather than meaningful, which is the rationale for the safeguard of an approval by a higher ranking officer. For these reasons, the court is satisfied that the findings by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal cannot be disturbed." 18. Further, this Court in the case of Central India Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. ITO [2011 SCC OnLine Del 472] has taken a view that merely rubber stamping ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the apex court in Union of India v. M.L. Capoor, (1973) 2 SCC 836 : AIR 1974 SC 87, 97 wherein it was observed as under: "27.. .. We find considerable force in the submission made on behalf of the respondents that the 'rubber stamp' reason given mechanically for the supersession of each officer does not amount to 'reasons for the proposed supersession'. The most that could be said for the stock reason is that it is a general description of the process adopted in arriving at a conclusion. 28.. .. If that had been done, facts on service records of officers considered by the Selection Committee would have been correlated to the conclusions reached. Reasons are the links between the materials on which certain conclusions are based and the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of them appear to have taken the duty imposed on them under those provisions as of little importance. They have substituted the form for the substance. 20. This Court, while following Chhugamal Rajpal in the case of Ess Adv. (Mauritius) S. N. C. Et Compagnie v. ACIT [2021 SCC OnLine Del 3613], wherein, while granting the approval, the ACIT has written-"This is fit case for issue of notice under section 148 of the Income- tax Act, 1961. Approved", had held that the said approval would only amount to endorsement of language used in Section 151 of the Act and would not reflect any independent application of mind. Thus, the same was considered to be flawed in law. 21. The salient aspect which emerges out of the foregoing discussion is that....