Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue appealed against an order of the CIT(A) which had quashed the assessment order passed u/s 153A. The assessee raised an additional ground that the assessment order was bad as it was passed without obtaining the mandatory approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that the legal issue raised was covered by previous decisions of the coordinate bench. It observed that the approval under Section 153D was granted for multiple assessees and assessment years without proper perusal.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment order passed under Section 153A is valid without obtaining a proper approval from the competent authority as required under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
153A, 143(3), 153D, 153C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Assessment Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Vs Shiv Vani Buildwell Private Ltd., Central Circle-14, Delhi New Delhi. PAN: AAPCS0835B CO No.44/Del/2025 ( Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shiv Vani Buildwell Private DCIT, Ltd., Central Circle-14, 151-A, Club Road, New Delhi Sainik Farm, New Delhi – 110 062. PAN: AAPCS0835B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Yudhister Mehtani, CA Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 02.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2025 ORDER
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 12.08.2024 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’, CO No.44/Del/2025 for short) in Appeal No.10335/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 31.12.2019 passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Central Circle- 14, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). The assessee has filed Cross Objections.
Heard and perused the records. Assessee raises an additional ground which is reproduced below; “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. C1T(A) ought to have quashed the impugned assessment order passed by Ld.AO u/s 153A without obtaining approval under section 153D in accordance with law and without complying with the mandatory conditions laid down under that section.”
As the additional ground raised is purely legal and can be decided on the basis of admitted facts on record, the same is admitted.
We find the aforesaid legal issue is fully covered by the Coordinate Bench, common order dated 10.01.2025 passed in name of other persons case which were centralized and for which a common approval was given u/s 153 D of the Act. The ld. DR defends the approval on similar basis.
Before deciding the legal issue in dispute, we may gainfully reproduce the approval u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act (for short ‘the Act’), which read as under:-
It can be observed that in Prateek Nagpal vs. ACIT decided vide (AY 2012-13), (AY 2013-14) & ITA no. 522/Del/2022 (AY 2014-15) and Anu Nagpal V. ACIT ITA No.3843/DEL/2024 CO No.44/Del/2025 order dated 16.04.2025 on similar facts and circumstances of the case as well common approval u/s 153D of the Income Tax Act dated 30.12.2019, the co- ordinate bench has quashed the entire proceedings initiated under section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act in the absence of a valid approval granted by the ACIT, Central Range-4, New Delhi.
The copy of approval u/s. 153D of the Act dated 30.12.2019 granted in total 28 assessees cases wherein, the present assessee’s name is mentioned at serial no. 10 and also perused the Tribunal’s order dated 10.1.2025 passed in the case of Prateek Nagpal’s case whose name also stands mentioned at serial no. 3 and of Anu Nagpal whose name is mentioned at Sr. 1&2 of the said approval u/s. 153D of the Act. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we find considerable cogency in the contention of the Ld. AR that exactly on similar facts and circumstances of the case, the Coordinate Bench vide its common order dated 10.01.2025 passed in another case viz. Prateek Nagpal (supra) similar legal issue was decided in favour of the assessee by quashing the entire proceedings initiated under section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act in the absence of a valid approval granted by the ACIT, Central Range-4, New Delhi.
Notably, the order of approval dated 30.12.2020 reproduced establishes that a single approval has been granted for various assessment years and various assessee. The said order also fails to make any mention of the fact that the draft