M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.

300 ITR 403Supreme Court of India2008#300 most cited

What is M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr. authority for?

Administrative orders must be consistent with the rules of natural justice.

268

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

M/s Sahara India (Farms) v CIT · 300 ITR 403 SC · administrative order · natural justice · speaking order

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 132Section 148Section 142(2A)Section 147Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)section 144basection 243section 153a(1)(a)section 142(2a)section 158bgsection 37bsection 245hacasus omissussection 43(3)section 245csection 271aaa

Judgments citing M/s Sahara India (Farms) v. CIT & Anr.

Mdlr Airlines (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1420/DEL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2007-08 A.Y. 2008-09

Section 132Section 142Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 153DSection 264

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-bui…

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

…Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) Vs. CIT (2008)169 Taxman 328 in which it has been held that grant of pre-decisional opportunity necessary. Similarly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) vs. CIT & Anr. reported in 300 ITR 403 (SC), while discussing the requirement of prior approval of Chief CIT or CIT in terms of provision of section 142(2A) of the Act, opined that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief CIT or CIT in terms of said the provision being an inbuilt protection against arbitrary or unjust exercise of power by the AO, casts a very heavy duty on th…

Kk Radhakrishnan, Kannur vs. DCIT Central Circle 2, Kozhikode

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is disposed on the aforesaid terms, and stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 494/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das & Sa No. 104/Coch/2023 (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153D

…hujbal v. ITO (136 taxmann.com 24 /[2022] 440 ITR 359 (Bom)) at paras 20 to 25/pgs. 11-13 of his order. While agreeing with the assessee’s stand in principle, which stands made with reference to the decision, among others, in Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT [2008] 300 ITR 403 (SC), the same stand found by him as distinguishable on facts. We find no infirmity therein, nor was any shown to us. The assessee’s Ground 2 is accordingly dismissed. 7.1 We, next, consider Grounds 3 & 4, impugning the additions made in assessment on merits, making it though clear that the same shall survive only where the assessee’s legal chal…

Mysore Finlease Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 8821/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 132

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in -bu…

Shri Krishna Educational Trust, Kurukshetra vs. DCIT Central Circle, Dehradun

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 170/DDN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2011-12
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153CSection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in - b…

Shri Krishna Educational Trust, Kurukshetra vs. DCIT Central Circle, Dehradun

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 169/DDN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2010-11
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153CSection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in - b…

Shri Krishna Educational Trust, Kurukshetra vs. DCIT Central Circle, Dehradun

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 168/DDN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2009-10
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153CSection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in - b…

Shri Krishna Educational Trust, Kurukshetra vs. DCIT Central Circle, Dehradun

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 167/DDN/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Dec 2023AY 2008-09
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153CSection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in - b…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 311/RJT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er as evident from the discussion aforesaid. In other words, the application of mind of the joint Commissioner was necessary in order to achieve the legislature intent. 13.9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT[2008] 169 Taxman 328/300 ITR 403 in the provisions of section 142(2A) where the AO after having regard to the nature and complexity/ volume of the accounts etc. was of the opinion that it is necessary so to do, he may, with the previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, direct the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant. The…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 310/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er as evident from the discussion aforesaid. In other words, the application of mind of the joint Commissioner was necessary in order to achieve the legislature intent. 13.9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT[2008] 169 Taxman 328/300 ITR 403 in the provisions of section 142(2A) where the AO after having regard to the nature and complexity/ volume of the accounts etc. was of the opinion that it is necessary so to do, he may, with the previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, direct the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant. The…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 309/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er as evident from the discussion aforesaid. In other words, the application of mind of the joint Commissioner was necessary in order to achieve the legislature intent. 13.9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT[2008] 169 Taxman 328/300 ITR 403 in the provisions of section 142(2A) where the AO after having regard to the nature and complexity/ volume of the accounts etc. was of the opinion that it is necessary so to do, he may, with the previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, direct the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant. The…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 308/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er as evident from the discussion aforesaid. In other words, the application of mind of the joint Commissioner was necessary in order to achieve the legislature intent. 13.9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT[2008] 169 Taxman 328/300 ITR 403 in the provisions of section 142(2A) where the AO after having regard to the nature and complexity/ volume of the accounts etc. was of the opinion that it is necessary so to do, he may, with the previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, direct the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant. The…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 307/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…er as evident from the discussion aforesaid. In other words, the application of mind of the joint Commissioner was necessary in order to achieve the legislature intent. 13.9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT[2008] 169 Taxman 328/300 ITR 403 in the provisions of section 142(2A) where the AO after having regard to the nature and complexity/ volume of the accounts etc. was of the opinion that it is necessary so to do, he may, with the previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, direct the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant. The…

Bvg India Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 516/PUN/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Sneha M. PadhiarFor Respondent: S/Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari & Abdhesh Kumar
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153D

…he Addl. CIT. Therefore, we find force in the arguments of the Ld.AR that the final assessment order is bad under law in absence of approval, accordingly, we hold the same. 46. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India (Firm) reported in 300 ITR 403 (SC), while discussing the requirement of prior approval, opined that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or the Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an inbuilt protection against any arbitrary or unjust exercise of power by the Assessing Officer, casts a very heavy duty on the said high ranking authority t…

DCIT, CC-20, New Delhi vs. Shiv Kumar Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1867/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jain,, CAFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-bui…

Shiv Kumar Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1285/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jain,, CAFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-bui…

Shiv Kumar Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1283/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jain,, CAFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-bui…

Shiv Kumar Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 1282/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jain,, CAFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…In its erudite judgement with the discussion on the legislative intent of Section 153A to 153D and the meaning of the "approval" as defined in Black's Law Dictionary as also the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Sahara India vs. CIT and Others (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) where the discussion on the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of Section 142(2A) of the Act had been made, it was noted that the Apex Court has held therein that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the said provision being an in-bui…

DCIT, Ajmer vs. M/S V.C. Granite, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 69A

…ue application of mind and on the basis of seized materials, the superior authority have to approve the draft Assessment order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘ Sahara India vs. CIT & Others’ [2008] 216 CTR 303 (S.C.) : [2008] 7 DTR (SC) 27: [2008] 300 ITR 403 (SC) while discussing the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of section 142(2A) of the Act, opined that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of said provision being an inbuilt protection against arbitrary or unjust exercise of power by the as…

V C Granites, Ajmer vs. DCIT Central Circle Ajmer, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 127/JPR/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 250Section 69A

…ue application of mind and on the basis of seized materials, the superior authority have to approve the draft Assessment order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘ Sahara India vs. CIT & Others’ [2008] 216 CTR 303 (S.C.) : [2008] 7 DTR (SC) 27: [2008] 300 ITR 403 (SC) while discussing the requirement of prior approval of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of provision of section 142(2A) of the Act, opined that the requirement of previous approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of said provision being an inbuilt protection against arbitrary or unjust exercise of power by the as…