SARAT CHANDRA PANDA,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, BHUBANESWAR

ITSSA 60/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 September 2026AY 2016-1714 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the approvals granted under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were unsustainable and consequently quashed. The reasoning was based on the observation that the approval letters were stereotype, lacked any reference to discussions or issues considered between the approving authority and the Assessing Officer, and indicated a non-application of mind. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Serajuddin & Co., which emphasized the need for the approving authority to indicate its thought process and examine the draft orders. The fact that multiple approvals were granted in a single letter further supported the finding of non-application of mind. The Tribunal also referred to the Supreme Court's decision in DCIT vs. Sunil Kr. Sharma. As the approvals were quashed for want of sanctity, the consequential assessment orders were also quashed. However, the Tribunal clarified that the returns of income filed in response to notices under Section 153C/153A would remain valid, and the disclosed income would not be disturbed, with the tax on such disclosed income remaining recoverable.

What were the facts?

These appeals were filed by the assessees (Sridhar Panda, Sheetal Swagatini Panda, Sarat Chandra Panda, and Babita Panda) against the orders of the CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar. The assessment years involved range from 2011-12 to 2017-18. The core of the dispute revolves around the validity of approvals granted under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessees' primary contention was that these approvals were granted mechanically, without proper application of mind, and in a non-prescribed format, citing multiple approvals in a single order. The revenue argued that these were technical defects that should not lead to the quashing of assessments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the approvals granted under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are invalid due to being granted mechanically and without proper application of mind, thereby vitiating the consequential assessments? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 153D). Assessee's contentions: The approvals were stereotype, lacking any reference to discussions or issues considered between the Additional Commissioner and the Assessing Officer. Multiple approvals were granted in a single order, indicating a non-application of mind. The issue is covered by the jurisdictional High Court's decision in M/s Serajuddin & Co. and a coordinate bench's decision in Soumendra Kumar Mohanty, both of which were affirmed by the Supreme Court. The approvals are liable to be quashed, and consequently, the assessments. Revenue's contentions: The defects are technical and nominal, and substantial justice should prevail over technicalities. The defects should not lead to the quashing of approvals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153D,Section 153C,Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH HYBRID HEARING AT KOLKATA) BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos.46 to 52/CTK/2026 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2011-12 to 2017-18) Sridhar Panda Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar At Mulkaida PO Anantapur, Balasore - 756046, Odisha PAN No. : AWUPP6598C (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.53 & 54/CTK/2026 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18) Sheetal Swagatini Panda Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar Plot – 3646/3706, Lane I, Gouri Nagar, BBSR, Bhubaneswar- 751002, Odisha PAN No. : CLFPP3941K (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. IT(SS)A Nos.55 to 60 & 602/CTK/2026 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2015- 16 to 2016-17 & 2017-18) Sarat Chandra Panda Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1, Bhubaneswar Plot – 3646/3706, Lane I, Gouri Nagar, BBSR, Bhubaneswar- 751002, Odisha PAN No. : AHCPP6982F (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

IT(SS)A Nos.61 to 66 & 603/CTK/2026 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2011-12 to 2016-17 & 2017-18) Babita Panda Vs DCIT, C

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 153D

All 2,907 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →