Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee and revenue filed cross appeals against the CIT(A)'s order concerning assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20. The primary issue was the validity of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Held
The Tribunal held that the approval under section 153D of the Act must be accorded separately for each assessment year, even for a single assessee. The common approval granted was deemed invalid for the impugned assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the approval under section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for framing assessment under section 153A r.w.s 143(3) needs to be granted separately for each assessment year.
Sections Cited
153A, 143(3), 153D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s and Revenue’s cross appeals to 2920/Del/2022 and to 17/Del/2023 for assessment years 2017-18 to 2019-20, are directed against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Kanpur-4's common order dated 10.10.2022 passed in case nos. CIT(A)- IV/KPN/11958, 11084, 11282/2016-17 to 2018-19, involving proceedings under section 153A/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'); respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
It emerges at the outset that the assessee herein canvasses his first and foremost legal ground seeking to annul the impugned section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act assessment framed on 29.09.2021 for want of invalid approval under section 153D of the Act.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective vehement contentions regarding the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessments as lacking valid approval under section 153D of the Act. The assessee has filed the learned prescribed authority’s common approval dated 28.09.2021 granted in four different assessees’ cases. Various landmark precedents i.e. PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (Del.), PCIT Vs. Anuj Bansal (2024) 466 ITR 254 (SC) and PCIT Vs. MDLR Hotels (P.) Ltd. (2024) 166
2 | P a g e taxmann.com 327 (Del.) PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (Del.) have already settled the issue in assessee’s favour and against the department that such an approval under section 153D has to be accorded separately for each and every assessment years even if it involves a single assessee. We thus accept the assessee's instant first and foremost legal grounds/arguments to quash the impugned assessment herein framed by the Assessing Officer on 29.09.2021 in very terms. That being the case, the assessee’s appeals to 2920/Del/2022 succeed and Revenue’s appeals to 17/Del/2023 fail in very terms. All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic.
To sum up, these assessee’s appeals to 2920/Del/2022 are allowed and Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 15 to 17/Del/2023 are dismissed, in the foregoing terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th August, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 12th August, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 3 | P a g e