Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A) orders for AY 2016-17 to 2020-21, raising an additional ground that challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the validity of the approval granted under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the approval was mechanical, without application of mind, and hence the consequential assessment orders were illegal and deserved to be annulled.
Held
The tribunal admitted the additional legal ground, emphasizing that such issues can be raised for the first time before appellate authorities. It restored the matter to the CIT(A) with a directive to re-examine the issues, providing the assessee a fair hearing and considering all relevant facts. This decision was also applied to the other connected appeals.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment orders passed under Section 153D are invalid due to the allegedly mechanical and non-application of mind in granting approval by the Addl. CIT, thereby challenging the AO's jurisdiction.
Sections Cited
Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
The appeals of the assessee are arising against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal)-Patna-3, (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] even dated 16.07.2024 for the AY 2016-17 to 2020-21.
Since the appeals related to the same assessee and involving the common issue therefore, these are being decided by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and conveyance. First, we take ITA No.584/PAT/2024.
“1. For that the additional grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other.
2. For that the assessment order passed by the AO is contrary to provision of section 153D of the Act. The approval granted by the Learned Addl. CIT, Central Range -
1. Patna u/s 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is mechanical in nature and without application of mind, therefore, the same is illegal and non-est and consequential assessment made on the basis thereof is also illegal and deserves to be annulled.
3. That the approval u/s 153D of the Act is null, void and without jurisdiction as the same is in violation of CBDT Circular No.19/2019 requiring DIN and consequential assessment order as passed deserves to be annulled.
4. That addition amounting to Rs. 81,76,026/- and Rs. 16,33,000/- are not called for. arbitrary, unjust and fit to be deleted.
5. For that the appellant reserves his right to file detailed submission at the time of hearing.
6. For that the appellant craves leave to urge, add or alter any other ground or grounds at the time of hearing.” 3.1. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the assessee has raised an additional ground of appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the AO to make assessment when the approval granted u/s 153D is invalid. Similary the assessee has also raised some other issues. In our opinion the issued raised in the additional ground is a purely a legal issue qua which the facts need to be examined and verified. In our considered view the assessee is at liberty to raise any legal issue before any appellate authority for the first time even when the same has not been raised before the lower authorities. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decisions of the Apex court in the case of i) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT in 187 ITR 688, ii) National Thermal 3.2. Since, the issue raised before us are not raised before the first appellate authority by the assessee therefore, this additional grounds are restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and also after taking into account the facts relating to these issues. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
A.Y. 2016-17 to 2021-22 to 590/PAT/2024 4. The issue raised in these appealsare similar to one as decided by us in for A.Y. 2015-16 (supra). Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to these appeals of assessee in to 590/PAT/2024. Hence, the assessee‘s appeals are allowed for statistical Purposes.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical Purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025.