ADITYA SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
The instant batch of eight appeals pertains to the single assessee herein namely, Sh. Aditya Sharma. All other relevant details thereof stand tabulated as under:
ITA Nos. 3616 to 3621, 5198 & 8404/Del/2019
Aditya Sharma
2
Sl.
No.
ITA Nos.
A.Y.
Appellant Respondent
Order passed against
Proceedings u/s 1. 3616
to 3621/Del/2019
2008-09
to 2013-14
Aditya
Sharma
ACIT
CIT(A)-27,
New
Delhi
Appeal
No.
568, 575, 576, 577,
578/16-17
Dated
25.02.2019,
26 & 27.03.2019
153A r.w.s.
143(3)
2. 8404/Del/2019
2013-14 Aditya
Sharma
ACIT
CIT(A)-27,
New
Delhi
Appeal
No.
579/16-17
Dated 26.03.2019
153A r.w.s.
143(3)
3. 5198/Del/2019
2013-14
DCIT
Aditya
Sharma
CIT(A)-27,
New
Delhi
Appeal
No.
579/16-17
Dated 26.03.2019
153A r.w.s.
143(3)
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
We next note that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of all the impugned assessments framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act; dated 02.03.2017, in consequence to the search action herein dated 15.02.2014, on the ground that the learned prescribed authority had not accorded a valid approval thereto u/s 153D of the Act. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the instant legal ground sought to be raised at the assessee’s behest goes to the root of the matter and therefore, we quote National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC); as considered in Allcargo 4. It is in this factual backdrop that we admit the assessee’s instant legal ground and note with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned Assessing Officer had sought the prescribed authority’s approval on 27.02.2017 which stood granted on 02.03.2017. The clinching fact which from page 10 in the assessee’s paper book is that the learned
ITA Nos. 3616 to 3621, 5198 & 8404/Del/2019
Aditya Sharma
3
Assessing Officer herein had infact sought a common approval for all these assessment years from 2008-09 to 2013-14 which stood granted, and therefore, we quote PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar
Hotels (P) Ltd. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) and ACIT vs. Serajuddin and Co. (2024) 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC), to conclude that such a combined section 153D approval indeed vitiates the entire assessment itself. We draw strong therefrom to quash all the impugned assessments framed herein in assessee’s case in assessment years 2008-09 to 2013-14 in very terms.
As a result, the assessee’s quantum appeals ITA Nos. 3616 to 3621/Del/2019 involving the corresponding impugned assessment succeed the Revenue’s cross appeal ITA No. 5198/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14 fails therefor. The assessee’s last appeal ITA No. 8404/Del/2019 also stands accepted since involving the consequential section 271(1)(c) penalty proceedings.
1 All other pleadings on merits herein stand rendered academic.
To sum up, these assessee’s seven appeals ITA Nos. 3616 to 3621 & 8404/Del/2019 are allowed and the Revenue’s cross appeal ITA No. 5198/Del/2019 is dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 15/01/2025. (M. Balaganesh) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 15/01/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*