TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....without jurisdiction and time barred and as such the Assessment Order passed in consequence thereof also become illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation 3. That on the facts and the circumstances of the case and the provisions of the Law the assessment framed is against the statutory provisions of the act and without complying to the procedures prescribed under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and as such assessment being bad in law deserves to be quashed. 4. That in view of the binding nature of Circular no. 19/2019 dated 14/08/2019 and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the UNDATED SATISFACTION NOTE without DIN and the consequential impugned order of assessment dated 14.12.2019 ought to be treated as invalid and non est. That the UNDATED SATISFACTION NOTE appears to be an afterthought and recorded after issuing notice u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the same was not provided to the assessee despite specific requests made on 01.10.2019 and 14.10.2019 during the course of assessment proceedings and the same renders the entire proceedings without jurisdiction, illegal and void ab initio. 5. That the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r 20.08.2024. He submitted that against the order of ld. CIT (A), the present appeal has thus been filed before ITAT on 21.02.2025. Ld. AR submitted that our counsel CA Mradul Pathak is looking after the Income Tax matters of the company M/s. Pushpanjali Constructions Pvt. Ltd., the assessee, since the last 30 years and the appeal against the order dated 20.08.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida was to be filed on or before 31.10.2024. Ld. AR submitted that assessee was given to understand that the counsel had prepared the appeal and the challan towards appeal filing fees was also deposited on 16.10.2024 and even the draft appeal was also prepared after logging on the ITAT portal and a copy of the same is also filed, although, the same remained pending for filing due to some sudden exigencies in his family. In this regard, the affidavit of the counsel to this effect along with supporting documents is enclosed herewith. He submitted that the delay in filing the appeal is quite unintentional and arising out of unavoidable circumstances and there was a genuine, reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing of appeal and the same may please be condoned. To support the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld CIT(A) against the above addition, after considering the submissions of the assessee, the same was dismissed vide order dated 20.08.2024. Now, the assessee is in appeal against the impugned order. 10. At the time of hearing, Ld AR of the assessee submitted his arguments, also filed his written submissions, the relevant issues raised before us alone is reproduced below for the sake of brevity: "6. The assessee filed an appeal before the Worthy CIT (A) against the above addition, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 20.08.2024. Now we are in appeal against the above order and out submissions are as under :- The sequence of events for the purposes of explaining the facts of the case are as under :- a) There was search and seizure operations on one Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, who is not related to assessee and independent 'third party' and during the course of search, from the independent premises of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, one agreement for purchase of 6.5545 hectares of land was found between the company owned by Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, namely 'M/s Jansewa Sehkari Awas Samiti Limited' and group of farmers, dated 31.07.2010. The said agreement was for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led agreement was also found, dated 03.06.2011, copy placed at paper book, which was in consequence to the agreement, dated 31 July 2010, which was entered into originally for a consideration of @ Rs. 55 lacs per bigha between Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta and farmers. e) Thus, since the assessee had now acquainted himself with the group of farmers and purchased 4.61 hectares of land, directly from the farmers for a total consideration of Rs. 17 crores, and the bifurcation of the same has been reproduced by the Assessing Officer, at page 13 of the assessment order. It is worthwhile to mention here that on the major portion of the land, 'High-Tension Wires' of the 'Electricity Department' were existing and nothing could be built below the said 'High Tension Wires' and due to the said disadvantage, the said wires were got shifted by the assessee concerned, by making a huge payment of Rs. 87,86,214/- to the Electricity department as per evidence enclosed in the paper book at pages 225-228, and the same was also furnished to the CIT(A). Thus, since this task of shifting of 'High Tension Wires' was very tedious and lot of time and energy was involved and, therefore, after considering the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ciated by the authorities below. The assessee for the purposes of the same have even furnished the 'valuation' report of the registered valuer and the copies of the challans of the payment of Rs. 87,86,214 made to the electricity Department, for removing of the wires and the same are again enclosed in the paperbook at pages 228. 10. Therefore, if we take into consideration the first agreement dated 31st July, 2010, between the company, owned by Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, namely 'Jansewa Sehkari Awas Samiti Limited' with the farmers vide agreement, placed at paper book at pages 245-261, then the rate, at which, we had purchased the land of 4.61 hectares directly from the farmers for a consideration of Rs. 17 crores is fully justified in view of the following working:- Area of Land Amount of consideration i)). Consideration agreed for 1 Bigha of land between Ghanshyam Gupta and farmers vide agreement, dated_____ 85,00,000 ii) Rate of 1 hectare 85,00,000*4 (1 Hectare=4 bighas) 3,40,00,000 iii) Rate of 4.61 hectares of land at the same rates reflected in the agreement, dated 31.07.2010 15,67,40,000 Amount of consideration for 4.61 hectares of land between ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....346;ांजलि कंस्ट्रक्शन प्रा. लि. को जानते है तथा इतने आपके या। । आपके किसी कन्सर्न से कोई समझौता हुआ है? चव Annexure A-7, का पेज नं. 01 से 72 जो आपके घर से सर्च के दौरान भीज हुआ था, को दिखा रहा हूँ। कृपया इसे देख कर बताएं कि इसमें लगे हु....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#2350; विवाद तुतज्ञगयात महमने कुछ जमीन Loadstar Infratac Pvt. Ltd. के नाम से खरीदी थी। इससे संबंधित Source of Investment के बारे में में बाद में बता दूंगा। Copy of said complete statement of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta recorded during post search is placed in the paper book at pages 134-138. 14. It is worthwhile mention here that though, originally agreement at the behest of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta was entered into on 02.05.2011 by the assessee and farmers but the land was finally purchased by the assessee, directly from the farmers majority in March 2012 as above and, thus, there was a gap of about one year and due to which, though, there may have been certain increase in the price of land, but still the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otice u/s 153C had been issued only for verification, whereas section 153 clearly lays down as under:- 153-C. Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately prec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such finding has been recorded therein. (ix) Your goodself's attention is invited to section 153C, which is equivalent to 148, where the AO assumes the jurisdiction over the completed assessment of assessee and before issue of notices, the AO, is mainly required to satisfy that how there is escapement and what is quantification of income is there on the basis of documents seized during the course of proceeding from third party and since nothing has been mentioned therein, the proceedings as initiated u/s 153C are bad. x). Further, it is also pointed out herewith the said satisfaction note does not specify the assessment year, for which, the information has been provided and with regard to the same, it is submitted that a valid satisfaction note should clearly specify the assessment year and should also quantify the 'issue wise' amount in respect of which, such satisfaction is proposed. However, from a perusal of the satisfaction note, it is clear that neither there is any mention of the assessment year, to which, the so called information relates and nor the amount of alleged escapement of income has been mentioned there and only things have been mentioned in a ve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-7 v. RRJ Securities Ltd. 62 taxmann.com 391, Delhi High Court, (refer Para 35-39) b). In Pepsi Foods (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2014] 367 ITR 112/52 taxmann.com 220/[2015] 231 Taxman 58 (Delhi), this Court had explained that on a plain reading of Section 153C of the Act, a notice under that section could be issued only after two preceding conditions had been met. First of all, the AO of the searched person would have to arrive at a satisfaction that document or asset seized does not belong to the person searched but to some other person and secondly, the seized documents/assets are handed over to the AO having jurisdiction over that person, that is, the person other than the one searched and to whom the seized documents/assets are said to belong. (refer para 6- 11) c). Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax [Central] Circle- 1(1) 171 taxmann.com 842 (Nagpur - Trib.)- 18. At the very outset and without prejudice to our objections that the proceedings u/s 153C have wrongly been initiated, we beg to submit that even no cognizance can be taken of the 'third party' evidence as in the present case, which has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een made on the basis of the so called 'loose slips' found at the residence of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, third party and which are reproduced on page 5-12 of the assessment order by AO. ii). It is submitted that the said slips/rough notings has been seized from third party and it does not belong to the assessee, as it neither contains the name of the assessee, any date and nor the same is in the hand writing of the assessee or any Authorized representative of the assessee. iii) Therefore, as per the provision of section 132(4A), it is deemed that any such document found during the course of search from the possession or control of the person searched shall belong to such person only. iv) It is further submitted that such rough documents is not supported by any corroborative material, evidence on record and it is also a fact on record that even the statement of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta was recorded during the course of post search and no statement was recorded against such rough documents and the same is evidenced from the copy of statements of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta enclosed in the paper book at pages 134-138. v) In question No. 18 of the statement of Mr. Gha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d into transactions giving rise to income which had not been disclosed in regular books of account - Tribunal, therefore, upheld order of Commissioner (Appeals) - Whether findings of facts recorded by Tribunal could be interfered with - Held, no" b). Ashwani Kumar v. ITO 39 ITD 183 (Delhi)-"Section 69A, read with section 132(4A), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained moneys - Assessment year 1985-86 - Assessee was engaged in business of purchase and sale of cement - During relevant accounting period a search was conducted at assessee's business premises and department found an amount of Rs. 1,86,330 in cash - Assessee stated that it belonged to D and in which he was a partner and aforesaid amount was cash-in-hand - Whether in view of facts that assessee's total sale was of Rs. 1,10,23,744 it could be said that amount found in search was cash-in-hand and, thus, same was not an unexplained money includible in assessee's income - Held, yes Section 69, read with section 132(4A), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investment - Assessment year 1985-86 - Whether in view of facts mentioned under above head "Unexplained money", document which was found at time o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad not been accounted for nor there were separate withdrawals shown for their purchase, in the absence of any evidence about the period of their purchase, the same would be deemed to have been acquired as on the date of search out of undisclosed income under the provisions of section 69A. e). K. Gupta v. CIT [1999] 63 TTJ (Delhi) 532-"The basis of addition in this case is a seized paper - p. 13, Annexure AI, relating to purchase/sale of property. The document bears the caption "Estimates". There seems some truth in the explanation of the assessee where it is alleged that the entries relate to some futuristic planning. Since the assessee is carrying on the business of estate agent, in the process of this business, he is required to discuss various plans, projects and proposals with various parties like brokers, builders, etc. These discussions generally take place before a project for purchase of development, plans are discussed as the assessee acts as an agent on behalf of the buyer or seller. The basis of addition by the Revenue is entirely rests on the presumption of recovery of p. 13, Annexure A-1, and the presumption contained under s. 132(4A) of the IT Act. In this co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sold the land to the other parties apart from Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, acting as a mediator, the said document, cannot be said to be belonging to assessee at all. (ix) Further, it is submitted that as per the settled law as stated above document as found from the premises of third party, has to be considered in the hands of the person from whom such documents are found, because he is sole judge about the nature and source of such document and surprisingly, no adverse view has been drawn of such document in the hands of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, while framing his assessment u/s 153A and more particularly, the said document did not form the basis of drawing the satisfaction note against the assessee and, thus, the consideration of such document and drawing adverse inference against the assessee of having paid 'on money' which was neither proved from documents nor from the factual facts and circumstances as elaborated above, it is prayed that such finding of the authorities below does not stand to the test of scrutiny. The copy of the assessment order of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta is enclosed in the paperbook at pages 231-244. 20. Further, it is also submitted that the assessee duri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Group/Approval/2019-20/2300 dated 12.12.2019. 24. This approval depicts that the Dy. CIT (Central Circle), Ghaziabad has requested for approval from Addl. CIT of Income Tax (Central) Range, Meerut via letter No. F. No. DCIT/CC/GZB/Rajeshwar Group/ Approval/ 2019-20/2300 dated 12.12.2019 for passing of the assessment orders in the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 201213 to 2018-19 containing 7 volumes. It is submitted that the approval of the same applications have been given by Addl. CIT of Income Tax (Central) Range, Meerut on the same date i.e. 12.12.2019, thereby implying that the concerned Authority has perused the entire set of records for 6 assessment years contained in 7 volumes on the same day the same was forwarded to him which is impossible and it depicts merely a mechanical approval by the said authority without going through the facts of the case. 25. The Directorate of Income Tax has given a detailed procedure before giving of the approval u/s 153D and the same is given in Clause 9 of Manual of Office Procedure, Volume II (Technical) February 2003 issued by Directorate of Income Tax on behalf of Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds and search material - High Court upheld Tribunal's finding - Against said order revenue filed instant SLP - Whether having regard to peculiar facts of instant case, matter needed no interference and thus, SLP was to be dismissed - Held, yes [Para 2] [In favour of assessee] ii). Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. MDLR Hotels (P.) Ltd., Delhi High Court- 166 taxmann.com 327 (Delhi) -Section 153D, read with section 153A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Prior approval for assessment - Tribunal quashed assessment order by holding that approval granted under section 153D was not valid as Competent Authority accorded approval to as many as 246 proposed assessments by way of single letter of approval without application of mind and approval so granted did not even refer to any seized material/assessment records or any other documents which could suggest that Authority had duly applied his mind before granting approvals - Whether in view of decision in Pr. CIT v. Pioneer Town Planners (P.) Ltd. [2024] 160 taxmann.com 652/465 ITR 356 (Delhi), no question of law arose from Tribunal's order - Held, yes [Para 5] [In favour of assessee] iii). Ambika A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liance is being placed on the following judgments: - a) ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. [2024] 163 taxmann.com 118(SC)[28-11-2023] b) ACIT vs. Serajuddin & Co. [2023] 150 taxmann.com 146 (Orissa)[15-03-2023] c) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar [2024] 163 taxmann.com 9 (Delhi)[15-05-2024] d). 2025 (3) TMI 994 - ITAT DELHI KEHAR SINGH VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI. e). 2025 (1) TMI 970 - ITAT DELHI INDER CHAND BAJAJ AE -17 VERSUSDCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-32 DELHI f). 2025 (4) TMI 1132 - ITAT DELHI APPLE COMMODITIES LIMITEDVERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, NOIDA g). 2024 (12) TMI 1107 - ITAT DELHI M/S AIRWILL INFRA LTD. VERSUSDY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA. h) 2025 (1) TMI 175 - ITAT DELHI KAVITA JAIN, BIJENDER KUMAR JAIN, SANDEEP JAIN, SMT. RAKHI JAIN, NARENDER KUMAR JAIN, SURINDERKUMAR JAIN, JAGDISH PRASHAD JAIN VERSUS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLEKARNAL i). 2025 (2) TMI 915 - ITAT DELHI GULZAR AHMED VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN j). 2024 (12) TMI 1553 - ITAT MUMBAI NILESH SHAMJI BHARANIVERSUS DCIT, CC-4 (1), MUMBAI k). SP SINGLA CONSTRUCTION COMP....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....u/s 132(4) has mandatorily required to be considered in the hands of person from whom, the documents are found as per settled law. j). Even Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta in his post search statement agreed to the fact that the agreement, dated 02.05.2011 had been cancelled and that affidavit has been ignored summarily. k). Affidavit duly attested of the farmers filed and they were not summoned u/s 133(4)/131 and, thus, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mehta Parikh, reported in 30 ITR 131 and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Glasslines Equipment reported in 253 ITR 454 that the contents of the affidavit have to be proved to be true if no other material is available on record. Thus, in view of the above said facts and case laws, the addition as sustained by the CIT (A), may, please, be deleted." 11. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue submitted that : (a) With regard to agreement, dated 02.05.2011 stated that there are signatures of the farmers on this agreement placed at Paper Book pages 75 to 76, submitted by the assessee and also stated that the transaction was not with Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, but with the society....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed at pages 77 to 78 of Paper Book. It has been further stated in that agreement that the rates of land are very much on the higher side and the actual rates are quite less. The existence of dispute is also substantiated in the statement of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta recorded on 17.01.2018. Copy placed at Paper Book pages 134 to 137 and relevant page is Question No. 18 and its answer at page 136, in which, he has again confirmed that there was some dispute and also he has confirmed that earlier agreement of same land was with him. Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta has furnished an affidavit also, placed at page 80 of the 'Paper Book', confirming the cancellation of agreement, dated 20.05.2011 and the return of the amount has taken place as per agreement, dated 02.05.2011 as mentioned in the agreement, due to dispute, since the farmers could not agree to and, therefore, the agreement was cancelled on 20.05.2011. Thus, it was Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, who was main key person. 13. It has been mentioned by the AO in a very casual manner in the assessment order, but there are no other title deeds related to assessee, which have been found during the course of search from the residence of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta in his statement recorded on 17.01.2018 and relevant page is 134 and at page 136, in answer to question No. 19, Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta reiterated that since the land was disputed and the dispute could not be resolved and, therefore, the agreement, dated 02.05.2011 was cancelled with M/s Pushpanjali Construction Pvt. Ltd. Thus, the reliance on agreement, dated 02.05.2011 is not correct as relied by the AO/CIT(A). 19. This statement of Sh. Patiram is self contradictory as Patiram himself has executed the registered sale deed in favour of the Pushpanjali Constructions Pvt. Ltd. and no credence can be given to such arguments of CIT (DR). 20. It was replied that it is a fact on record that agreement dated 02.05.2011 was cancelled, where the signatures of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta are also there, affidavit of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, statement of Sh. Ghanshyam Gupta, in which, he stated that the land was disputed and there were no signatures of the land owner on the agreement, dated 02.05.2011 and in 'cancelled agreement' at page 77 to 78, it has been mentioned clearly that the agreement, dated 02.05.2011 was drawn under some misconception and the assessee was misled. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the AO records that based on the incriminating material found during the search need to be verified/examined from the regular books of account of the assessee during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, in view of the provisions of section 153C(1) read with section 153A of the Act, he is satisfied that proceedings u/s 153C read with section 153A is required to be initiated in the case of the assessee, accordingly the notices were issued. In our view, this is absolutely general and casual recording of satisfaction without any substance, there is no recording of details of escapement of income or quantification of escapement of income or any reference to the specific assessment year. We observed that the transaction of purchase was already recorded by the assessee in their books of account. The same was already available with the Revenue, the AO should have verified the same and should have recorded the satisfaction with more purpose. Further we observe that the AO has with held certain information which were found during the search and failed to share with the assessee, even this information was not recorded in the satisfaction note. With the above observations, we are of the view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... unjust exercise of power by the Assessing Officer, cannot be said to be a mechanical exercise, without application of independent mind by the Approving Authority on the material placed before it and the reasoning given 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/05/2024 at 21:34:51 that a letter dated 30.12.2018 was filed by the ld. AO before the ld. Addl. CIT seeking approval of draft assessment order u/s 153D of the Act. The ld. Addl. CIT has accorded approval 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 an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Bombay High Court held as under:- "1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 19th August, 2015. 2. Following question was argued before us for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified 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 re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refore, perfectly justified in coming to the conclusion that the approval was invalid in eye of law. We are conscious that the statute does not provide for any format in which the approval must be granted or the approval granted must be recorded. Nevertheless, when the Additional CIT while granting the approval recorded that he did not have enough time to analyze the issues arising out of the draft 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 ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all the common years instead of approval under Section 153B for each assessment year separately de horse the rules. The said approval is found to have been given in a mechanical and routine manner. We find that the order issuing authority has not discharged its statutory duties cast upon him even by assigning cogent reasons in respect of the issues involved in the matter. Thus granting approval in the absence of due application of independent mind to the material on record for each assessment year in respect of the assessee's case separately vitiates the entire proceedings; the same is found to be arbitrary and erroneous and therefore, liable to be quashed. We are also inspired by the ratio laid down in the Judgment narrated hereinabove passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court and respectfully relying upon the same with the above observation, we quash the entire proceeding initiated under Section 153C r.w.s 153A of the Act in the absence of a valid approval granted by the Learned Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-7, New Delhi. 12. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed." 28. Respectfully following the above precedents, we quas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the search and other documents collected from Shri Ghanshyam confirm that the agreement of sale was not acted upon due to the reason that the farmers rejected the proposal given by him which is much lesser compared to the actual purchase consideration offered by the assessee to farmers. Further we observe that the assessee also had not purchased the full quantity from Shri Ghanshyam and the actual land purchased was only 4.61 hectares. The presumption adopted by the AO on the basis of original agreement to sell that the assessee must have paid huge cash, however, there is no record with the AO to substantiate his findings or presumptions. All the documents submitted by the assessee prove that the assessee had originally entered into agreement with Shri Ghanshyam to buy land 6.5545 hectares, however it was later found that Shri Ghanshyam tried to make additional gain by selling the same piece of land to the assessee by purchasing the same for much lesser price that is Rs. 55 lakhs per Bigha land from the farmers compared to the agreement entered with the assessee to sell the same at Rs. 1.15 crores. Therefore, the assessee cancelled the agreement and the same was also confirmed b....