ANAND PRAKASH,GHAZIABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the common Section 153D approval granted for multiple assessees and assessment years is invalid, citing various precedents. Therefore, the assessment framed based on such an approval is quashed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue and assessee filed cross-appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for Assessment Year 2019-20. The appeals arise from proceedings under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The core issue is the validity of the assessment order which was based on a common Section 153D approval.
What were the issues?
Validity of the assessment order due to a common Section 153D approval for multiple assessees and assessment years.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar597 citing166 Taxmann.com 327 · 2024 · HC · Read judgment
- PCIT v. Anuj Bansal147 citing466 ITR 254 · 2024 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These Revenue’s and the assessee’s cross appeals & Assessment Year 2019-20, arise against the CIT(A)-3, Noida’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2023-24/1063074819(1) dated 21.03.2024, in proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It next transpires during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessment herein framed by the learned DCIT, Central Circle, & 2426/Del/2024 Anand Prakash Ghaziabad dated 29.09.2021 itself in furtherance to the search action dated 30.07.2018. This is for the precise reason that the assessee has placed on record the learned Addl. CIT, Central Range, Meerut’s common section 153D approval dated 28.09.2021 before us involving not only the assessee namely Sh. Anand Prakash but also M/s Charu Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Smt. Anjali Gupta and M/s P S Enterprises. He further quotes the tribunal’s recent order dated 12.08.2025 involving the above entity M/s P S Enterprises in to 2920/Del/2022 quashing section 153A assessment for the very reason of a common section 153D approval as under: “3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective vehement contentions regarding the first and foremost issue of validity of the impugned assessments as lacking valid approval under section 153D of the Act. The assessee has filed the learned prescribed authority’s common approval dated 28.09.2021 granted in four different assessees’ cases. Various 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.) PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (2024) 467 ITR 186 (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 years even if it involves a single assessee. We thus accept the assessee's instant first and foremost legal grounds/arguments to quash the impugned assessment herein framed by the Assessing Officer on 29.09.2021 in very terms. That being the case, the assessee’s appeals ITA Nos. 2918 to 2920/Del/2022 succeed and Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 15 to 17/Del/2023 fail in very terms.”
All these clinching intervening developments have gone un-rebutted from the Revenue side. We make it clear that the & 2426/Del/2024 Anand Prakash learned CIT-DR has indeed taken pains to place on record comments dated 10.11.2025 of the ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad that section 153D approval exercise is indeed a detailed procedure involving elaborate discussion at various levels. Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that given the fact that this tribunal has quashed already an identical assessment framed on the basis of the very approval, the assessee’s instant legal ground deserves to be accepted in above terms by adopting judicial consistency. We Order accordingly.
All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.
This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and the assessee’s cross appeal
More judgments on Section 153A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, KanchipuramITA 2578/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, OggiamthoraipakkaITA 2577/CHNY/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shanmugham Thiagarajan, ChennaiITA 2576/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026