AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the JCIT under Section 153D was invalid due to lack of application of mind, rendering the assessment order liable to be quashed. Consequently, the grounds challenging the additions on merit became academic.
What were the facts?
During a search, evidence of suppressed professional receipts was found. The Assessing Officer made additions after allowing some expenses not recorded in books. The CIT(A) granted partial relief on anesthesia charges but rejected other medicine expense claims.
What were the issues?
Whether the approval granted by the JCIT under Section 153D was valid and whether the assessment order passed without proper approval is liable to be quashed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(9)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.
- National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT5,834 citing229 ITR 383 · 1998 · SC
- Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT1,372 citing187 ITR 688 · 1991 · SC
- PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar597 citing163 Taxmann.com 9 · 2024 · HC · Read judgment
- PCIT v. Sapna Gupta591 citing147 Taxmann.com 288 · 2023 · HC
- ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.500 citing163 Taxmann.com 118 · 2024 · SC
- CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd.340 citing64 Taxmann.com 313 · 2015 · SC
- ACIT v. Sirajuddin& Co.288 citing150 Taxmann.com 146 · 2023 · HC
- M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.268 citing300 ITR 403 · 2008 · SC
- Madhya Pradesh in CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemicals Ltd.188 citing56 Taxmann.com 390 · 2015 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:
1. 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2.
3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy //
Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 21.11.2024 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 22.11.2024 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Head 9 Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Atiquiddin Shaikh vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Mr. Gurudev Singh vs. Kotak Mahindra BankMadhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026