Narayanappa v. CIT

63 ITR 219Supreme Court of India1967#503 most cited

What is Narayanappa v. CIT authority for?

The approval required from a higher authority under section 153D of the Income Tax Act is an administrative act, not a quasi-judicial one. Consequently, an opportunity of hearing is not required to be given to the assessee at the stage of obtaining such approval, provided the approving authority is competent.

187

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Narayanappa v. CIT · 63 ITR 219 · section 153D · administrative act · quasi-judicial act · approval from higher authority · opportunity of hearing · JCIT approval · judicial scrutiny · search assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151Section 250Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 114(e)section 43(3)section 147(a)section 151(1)section 158bbkelvinatorsection 153bwithin four yearssection 158bcsection 151(2)live linksection 158bg

Judgments citing Narayanappa v. CIT

Bora Agro Foods, Pune vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly

ITA 2362/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "ए" न्यायपीठ पुणे में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2360, 2361 & 2362/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 Bora Agro Foods, 'Samarat House', 39-D 2/6, Shankarsheth Road, Near Meera Society, Pune – 411037. PAN: AABFB4517E Appellant/Assessee vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Pune. Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Nikhil S Pathak Revenue by Shri Amol Khairnar – CIT(DR) Date of hearing 29/01/2026 Date of pronou…

Bora Agro Foods, Pune vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly

ITA 2361/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "ए" न्यायपीठ पुणे में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFOREDR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2360, 2361 & 2362/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years:2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 Bora Agro Foods, vs Dy.Commissioner of 'Samarat House', 39-D 2/6, Income Tax, Circle-5, Shankarsheth Road, Near Meera Pune. Society, Pune – 411037. PAN:AABFB4517E Appellant/Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Nikhil S Pathak Revenue by Shri Amol Khairnar – CIT(DR) Date of hearing 29/01/2026 Date of pronounceme…

Bora Agro Foods, Pune vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Pune

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly

ITA 2360/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar – CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "ए" न्यायपीठ पुणे में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2360, 2361 & 2362/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years:2015-16, 2017-18 & 2016-17 Bora Agro Foods, 'Samarat House', 39-D 2/6, Shankarsheth Road, Near Meera Society, Pune – 411037. PAN:AABFB4517E Appellant/Assessee vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Pune. Respondent /Revenue Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar – CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 29/01/2026 Date of pr…

Rekhaben Sharadkumar Mehta, Mumbai vs. Ward 42(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, Grounds No

ITA 8318/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Bijayananda Prusethrekhaben Sharadkumar Vs Ito Ward 42(1)(4) Mehta Room No.733, Kautilya Bhawan, 211 Tiwari Bhawan, S Modi Bkc, Mumbai 400051 Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai-400067 Pan:Ahppm8680G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat (SR DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 69BSection 92A

…o tax had escaped assessment for the said six years. Exercising our powers under article 226 of the Constitution, it is not possible for us to examine the sufficiency of the reasons. As observed by the Supreme Court in the case of S. Narayanappa v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 219 , if there are in fact some reasonable grounds for the ITO to believe that there had been any non-disclosure as regards any fact, which could have a material bearing on the question of under-assessment, that would be sufficient to give jurisdiction to the ITO to issue the notice under section 147(a) of the 1961 Act corresponding to section 34(1)(a…

Madina Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2471/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…sequent assessment framed by the AO. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on series of decision namely; (i) Chhugamal Rajpal Vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors on 21.01.1971, (ii) Sheo Nath Singh Vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC) (iii) S Narayanaappa Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC) (iv) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). ITA No.2467 to 2471/KOL/2024 Madina Rice Mill Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 to 2017-18 4.4. The ld. AR also relied on the decision Capital Broadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in WP(C) 4303/ 2017 dated 03.10.2024, wherein the Hon'ble court has decided the similar issue by holding that me…

Madina Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2470/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…sequent assessment framed by the AO. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on series of decision namely; (i) Chhugamal Rajpal Vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors on 21.01.1971, (ii) Sheo Nath Singh Vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC) (iii) S Narayanaappa Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC) (iv) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). ITA No.2467 to 2471/KOL/2024 Madina Rice Mill Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 to 2017-18 4.4. The ld. AR also relied on the decision Capital Broadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in WP(C) 4303/ 2017 dated 03.10.2024, wherein the Hon'ble court has decided the similar issue by holding that me…

Madina Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2469/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Nov 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…sequent assessment framed by the AO. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on series of decision namely; (i) Chhugamal Rajpal Vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors on 21.01.1971, (ii) Sheo Nath Singh Vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC) (iii) S Narayanaappa Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC) (iv) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). ITA No.2467 to 2471/KOL/2024 Madina Rice Mill Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 to 2017-18 4.4. The ld. AR also relied on the decision Capital Broadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in WP(C) 4303/ 2017 dated 03.10.2024, wherein the Hon'ble court has decided the similar issue by holding that me…

Madina Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2468/KOL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…sequent assessment framed by the AO. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on series of decision namely; (i) Chhugamal Rajpal Vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors on 21.01.1971, (ii) Sheo Nath Singh Vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC) (iii) S Narayanaappa Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC) (iv) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). ITA No.2467 to 2471/KOL/2024 Madina Rice Mill Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 to 2017-18 4.4. The ld. AR also relied on the decision Capital Broadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in WP(C) 4303/ 2017 dated 03.10.2024, wherein the Hon'ble court has decided the similar issue by holding that me…

Madina Rice Mill Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2467/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…sequent assessment framed by the AO. In defense of his argument, the ld. AR relied on series of decision namely; (i) Chhugamal Rajpal Vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors on 21.01.1971, (ii) Sheo Nath Singh Vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC) (iii) S Narayanaappa Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC) (iv) Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). ITA No.2467 to 2471/KOL/2024 Madina Rice Mill Private Limited; A.Y. 2013-14 to 2017-18 4.4. The ld. AR also relied on the decision Capital Broadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO in WP(C) 4303/ 2017 dated 03.10.2024, wherein the Hon'ble court has decided the similar issue by holding that me…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 153/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 152/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 151/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 150/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 149/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 148/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 148 to 153/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16 to 2021-22) Dileep K. Gupta, Vs. DCIT, 311, Sanjay Enclave, Central Circle-31, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi Northwest Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADPG4888K Assessee by : Shri Amit Goel, CA Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 19/11/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. These appeals in ITA No. 148 to 153/Del/2025 for AYs 2015-16 to 2021- 22,…

Addl.CIT, New Delhi vs. Makemytrip (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, Cross Objections of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5384/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhआअसं. 5384 & 5385/िद"ी/2017(िन.व. 2007-08 & 2008-09)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, & Shri Somil AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 40

…matter to be looked into at that stage. Reliance is placed on: a. HA Nanji & Co. vs. ITO (19670 120 ITR 593 (Cal); b. Sheo Nath Singh vs. AAC (1971) 82 ITR 142 (SC) c. Raymond Wollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC); d. S. Narayanappa vs. CIT ( 1967) 63 ITR 219 at page 222 (SC). (Emphasis supplied) 7. In the light of the legal principles laid down by Hon'ble Courts as discussed above, it is submitted that the assessing officer has not committed any error in facts and in law while issuing the notice u/ s 147 / 148 and was justified in forming the belief that the income of the appellant has escaped assess…

Moin Akhtar Qureshi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 19, New Delhi

ITA 7034/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Ms. VanshikaFor Respondent: Ms.Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 132 or requisitioned is made under section 132A. 6.1 Section 153D of the Act is for administrative purposes and does not require that an opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) as to whether such approval is merely an administrative act or whether such approval can be brought under judicial scrutiny. The apex court held that the stage of obtaining approval from higher authority was administrative in character and not a quasi-judicial act. What is to be seen is whether the Approving Authority is competent to grant ap…

ACIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. Nasreen Moin Qureshi, New Delhi

ITA 2944/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Ms. VanshikaFor Respondent: Ms.Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 132 or requisitioned is made under section 132A. 6.1 Section 153D of the Act is for administrative purposes and does not require that an opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) as to whether such approval is merely an administrative act or whether such approval can be brought under judicial scrutiny. The apex court held that the stage of obtaining approval from higher authority was administrative in character and not a quasi-judicial act. What is to be seen is whether the Approving Authority is competent to grant ap…

Nasreen Moin Qureshi, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-19, New Delhi

ITA 2412/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Ms. VanshikaFor Respondent: Ms.Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 132 or requisitioned is made under section 132A. 6.1 Section 153D of the Act is for administrative purposes and does not require that an opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) as to whether such approval is merely an administrative act or whether such approval can be brought under judicial scrutiny. The apex court held that the stage of obtaining approval from higher authority was administrative in character and not a quasi-judicial act. What is to be seen is whether the Approving Authority is competent to grant ap…

ACIT, Central Circle- 19, New Delhi vs. Moin Akhtar Qureshi, New Delhi

ITA 2144/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Ms. VanshikaFor Respondent: Ms.Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ction 132 or requisitioned is made under section 132A. 6.1 Section 153D of the Act is for administrative purposes and does not require that an opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 (SC) as to whether such approval is merely an administrative act or whether such approval can be brought under judicial scrutiny. The apex court held that the stage of obtaining approval from higher authority was administrative in character and not a quasi-judicial act. What is to be seen is whether the Approving Authority is competent to grant ap…