Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES ‘B’: NEW DELHI.
(Assessment Year: 2021-22) Mrs. Mamta Sharda, vs. DCIT, Central Circle, 114/115B, TP Nagar, Meerut. Jagan Nath Puri, Meerut – 250 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : ANYPS3989F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gagan R Khandelwal, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date of Order : 19.11.2025 O R D E R
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessees, Mrs. Reema Sharda and Mrs. Mamta Sharda, have filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 10.06.2025 and 24.12.2024 for the Assessment Years 2022-23 and 2021-22 respectively.
At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has challenged the legal issue that the authority under section 148B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 erred in not granting appropriate approval as required u/s 148B of the Act. He submitted that the approval granted by the authority u/s 148B is mechanical and without application of mind and hence, the consequent assessment order is bad in law and needs to be quashed. Further he submitted that the approval dated 23.05.2023 granted by the authority u/s 148B of the Act is bad in law inasmuch as a single approval has been granted for six assessees including the assessees in the present impugned assessment order. He submitted that the coordinate Bench in a batch of eight cases involving three assessees, namely, Mr. Manish Sharda, Ms. Mamta And Ms. Rakhi Sharda, on the similar issue allowed the appeals by quashing the assessments vide order dated 30.04.2025 and filed a copy of the same in the record. Accordingly, he pleaded that the assessments in the present cases may also be quashed.
On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below but could not controvert the aforesaid proposition.
4. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We find that the approval dated 23.05.2023 granted by the Addl.CIT, Central Range, Meerut is mechanical and without application of mind inasmuch as a single approval has been granted for six assessees including the present assessees. Further we observe that coordinate Bench in a batch of eight cases involving three assessees, namely, Mr. Manish Sharda, Ms. Mamta And Ms. Rakhi Sharda, on the similar issue allowed the appeals by quashing the assessments vide order dated 30.04.2025 by relying on various judgments of Hon’ble Courts, and held as under :- “2. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
3. 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 u/s 148B dated 09.06.2023 for six assessment years involving these three assessees, which has already been held as not sustainable going by PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 163 taxman.com 9 (Del), PCIT Vs. MDLF Hotels (P.) Ltd. (2024) 166 taxmann.com 327 (Del.) and ACIT Vs. Serajuddin and Co. (2024) 163 taxmann.com 118 (SC).
That being the case, I adopt the judicial consistency to quash all these assessments framed on 24.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 in all these assessee’s appeals pertaining to assessment years 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22, respectively.
All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. to 266/Del/2025 4 | P a g e 6. These three assessees’ eight respective appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.”
5. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we quash the assessment framed in the present cases pertaining to AYs 2021-22 and 2022-23 and allow the present appeals. 6. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 19TH day of November, 2025.