Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals and cross-objections involved a batch of ten cases pertaining to the assessee, Sh. Honey Arora, for assessment years 2010-11 to 2019-20. The core issue was the validity of the assessments, which had received a combined approval for all ten years. The assessee's primary argument was that the approval under Section 153D of the IT Act should have been granted separately for each assessment year.
Held
The Tribunal, relying on various landmark precedents, held that the approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, must be accorded separately for each assessment year, even when dealing with a single assessee. Therefore, the combined approval for all ten years was deemed invalid.
Key Issues
Whether the combined approval granted by the prescribed authority for multiple assessment years for the purpose of proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid.
Sections Cited
153D, 153A
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: ‘E’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
ORDER PER BENCH: The instant batch of ten cases pertains to the single assessee herein, namely, Sh. Honey Arora. All other relevant details thereof are tabulated as under:
ITA Nos.889, 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 Sl. Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Order Appealed against No. 1- Central Honey Arora, CIT(A), Delhi’s-31’s order 889/Del/2025 Circle-25, Delhi dated 13.11.2024 having WITH New Delhi DIN & Order No. C.O. No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 259/Del/2025 25/1070340573(1) involving for AY: 2010-11 proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. 3- ACIT, Central Honey Arora, CIT(A), Delhi-31’s order /Del/2025 Circle-25, Delhi dated 13.11.2024 having WITH New Delhi DIN & Order No. C.O. No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 260/Del/2025 25/1070340951(1) involving for AY: 2016-17 proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. 5- ACIT, Central Honey Arora, CIT(A), Delhi-31’s order /Del/2025 Circle-25, Delhi dated 13.11.2024 having WITH New Delhi DIN & Order No. C.O. No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 261/Del/2025 25/1070340726(1) involving for AY: 2017-18 proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. 7- ACIT, Central Honey Arora, CIT(A), Delhi-31’s order /Del/2025 Circle-25, Delhi dated 13.11.2024 having WITH New Delhi DIN & Order No. C.O. No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 262/Del/2025 25/1070340684(1) involving for AY: 2018-19 proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. 9- ACIT, Central Honey Arora, CIT(A), Delhi-31’s order /Del/2025 Circle-25, Delhi dated 13.11.2024 having WITH New Delhi DIN & Order No. C.O. No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 263/Del/2025 25/1070340626(1) involving for AY: 2019-20 proceedings under Section 153A of the Act.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessments itself as the learned prescribed authority herein had accorded its combined approval dated 23rd April, 2021 (page 557 of the paper- book) for ten assessment years 2010-11 to 2019-20 in the 2 | P a g e , 998, 1012, 1014 & 1015/Del/2025 C.O. Nos.259 to 263/Del/2025 assessee’s case. Various recent 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 taxmann.com 327 (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 year even if it involves a single assessee. We thus accept the assessee’s instant first and foremost legal ground/argument to quash the impugned assessment herein framed by the learned Assessing Officer on 24.04.2021 in very terms.
All other pleadings between the parties on merits are hereby rendered academic.