TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1619
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e him against the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO, for short). Further details of the orders of the lower authorities are as under:- ITA No. CIT(A) who passed the order Appeal No. & Date of order of the CIT(A) AO who passed the assessment order & Date of order Section of the IT Act under which the AO passed the order 2824/Del/2023 CIT(A)-28, New Delhi. 29/10605/2016- 17. Dated 03.08.2023 DCIT. Central Circle-27, New Delhi, date: 30.09.2021 153A 2825/Del/2023 - Do - 29/10479/2017- 18. Dated 03.08.2023 - Do - - Do - 2826/Del/2023 - Do - 29/10571/2018- 19. Dated 03.08.2023 - Do - - Do - 2827/Del/2023 - Do - 29/10510/2019- 20. Dated 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'), it is respectfully submitted that the ground of appeal raised before the CIT (A) relating to approval u/s 153D of the Act differs from the ground raised before the Hon'ble ITAT on the same issue. Before Hon'ble CIT(A), assessee had raised the ground that assessment orders were passed without prior approval u/s 153D of the Act while before Hon'ble ITAT, the appellant has raised the ground that approval was mechanical. Therefore, the ground of appeal rose before the Hon'ble ITAT constitutes an additional ground of appeal for which an application under ITAT Rule 11 should have been made by assessee for admission of said additional ground of appeal. Thus, it is most respectfull....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee while approving the same u/s 153D of the Act. In view of the above-said CBDT guideline dated 22.12.2006 (Para 1.7 therein) the assessment in all cases of a search group/an assessee are framed simultaneously so as to make coordinated decision and to eliminate the possibility of assessment in wrong hand(s) and wrong year(s). Furthermore, it is humbly submitted that there can't be any presumption drawn against the approving authority with regard to application of mind merely on the ground that number of cases approved in a day were high. There cannot be any threshold limit set for the same. How many cases will be considered unreasonably high and how many cases will be considered reasonable. It is submitted that every approval nee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee has tried to justify its' stand of mechanical approval by citing other approvals of different dates for the mere reason that the language in these approvals is similar. On this issue, it is respectfully submitted that once the approval is there and it refers not only to perusal of facts and records bv the Range head but also refers to discussions held with the Assessing officer from time to time, then such contentions can, at best be said to be surmises on part of the assessee since assessee has brought up nothing to disprove the fact that the Range head had discussions with AO from time to time. Further, there is nothing in law which says that the approvals cannot have similar language once the approving autho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had been granted for 85 cases in a single day and there was nothing on record to show that the Range head had applied his mind. In the case of present assessee, no such case has been made out by the assessee and the approval mentions only the cases of the assessee. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is most respectfully submitted that the contentions of the sssessee on the issue of approval of u/s 153D of the Act may please be rejected and the order of the AO may please be upheld." 3. After giving thoughtful consideration to the matter on record and the various decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court; Hon'ble Allahabad High Court; Hon'ble Orissa High Court; judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. ....