What is PCIT v. Sreelekha Damani authority for?

The validity of approval is a fundamental issue that can be raised at any time, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear such issues even if they did not originate from the orders of the CIT(A).

How many judgments cite PCIT v. Sreelekha Damani?

208 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. Sreelekha Damani (307 CTR 218), spanning 2020 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. Sreelekha Damani come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153A, Section 153D, Section 143(3), Section 153C, Section 132, Section 153B.

PCIT v. Sreelekha Damani (307 CTR 218)

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 112/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s153D. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. Shreelekha Damani (Mum-Trib) approved by jurisdictional HC subsequently as reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the assessee. 11.7. Very recently, Sanjay Duggal (Del-Trib) dt.19-1-21 has also echoed the same view after a detailed analysis of similar facts and also expressed a discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority u/s153D. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in precedi…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s153D. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. Shreelekha Damani (Mum-Trib) approved by jurisdictional HC subsequently as reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the assessee. 11.7. Very recently, Sanjay Duggal (Del-Trib) dt.19-1-21 has also echoed the same view after a detailed analysis of similar facts and also expressed a discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority u/s153D. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in precedi…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication& Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s153D. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. Shreelekha Damani (Mum-Trib) approved by jurisdictional HC subsequently as reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the assessee. 11.7. Very recently, Sanjay Duggal (Del-Trib) dt.19-1-21 has also echoed the same view after a detailed analysis of similar facts and also expressed a discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority u/s153D. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in precedi…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication& Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 109/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s153D. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. Shreelekha Damani (Mum-Trib) approved by jurisdictional HC subsequently as reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the assessee. 11.7. Very recently, Sanjay Duggal (Del-Trib) dt.19-1-21 has also echoed the same view after a detailed analysis of similar facts and also expressed a discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority u/s153D. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in precedi…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication& Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 108/NAG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…the superior authority in mechanical manner defeats the very purpose of obtaining approval u/s153D. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. Shreelekha Damani (Mum-Trib) approved by jurisdictional HC subsequently as reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the assessee. 11.7. Very recently, Sanjay Duggal (Del-Trib) dt.19-1-21 has also echoed the same view after a detailed analysis of similar facts and also expressed a discordant note on such mechanical exercise of responsibility placed on designated authority u/s153D. Hence, vindicated by the factual position as noted in precedi…

Mysore Bhaskara Pankaja, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle -15, Delhi

In the result, no question of law arises

ITA 3823/DEL/2023[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA

Section 127Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153DSection 69A

…u/s 153D of the Act. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in Shreelekha Damani vs. DCIT 173 TTJ 332(Mum.) which has been approved by jurisdictional High Court subsequently, reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the Assessee, wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under:- “1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 19th August, 2015. 2. Following question was argued before us for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances o…

Millenium Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-28, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 458/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Mr. S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. No. 458 /Del/2022 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) Millenium Vinimay Pvt. Vs. Acit Ltd., Dpt, 801, Dlf Central Circle – 28 Prime Tower, Plot No.F- New Delhi 79 & 80, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaecm 5383 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & I.T.A. No. 827/Del/2022 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) Dcit Vs. Millenium Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle -28 164, M.G. Road, Budge, Delhi West Bengal – 700 137 Pan: Aaecm 5383 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshul, Sr. D.R

Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)Section 153DSection 250(6)

…l u/s 153D of the Act. Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in Shreelekha Damani vs. DCIT 173 TTJ 332(Mum.) which has been approved by jurisdictional High Court subsequently, reported in 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the Assessee, wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under:- “1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 19th August, 2015. 2. Following question was argued before us for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of t…

M/S Ganesh Builders, Panchkula vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 452/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR &

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 251Section 251(1)Section 271

…These were subsequently noted and corrected by the CIT(A) and he has made a remark in this regard at Para 5.3.7 at Page 64 of his order. 16.13 To support his contentions, the Ld. AR relied upon the ratio of following judgements:  PCIT vs Shreelekha Damani (307 CTR 218) (2019) (Bom. HC)  Inder International vs ACIT (ITA No. 1573/Chd/2018) dtd. 07.06.2021 (ITAT Chd.)  ACIT vs. M/s Serajuddin& Co. Kolkata (ITA Nos. 39 to 45 of 2022) dtd. 15.03.2023 (Orissa HC).  In PCIT vs. Siddarth Gupta [(2023) 450 ITR 534] (All. HC). 16.14 It was further submitted that it is also evident from the assessment order as well as…

M/S Luxmi Builders, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

In the result, the respective appeals and stay applications are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 451/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR &

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 251Section 251(1)Section 271

…These were subsequently noted and corrected by the CIT(A) and he has made a remark in this regard at Para 5.3.7 at Page 64 of his order. 16.13 To support his contentions, the Ld. AR relied upon the ratio of following judgements:  PCIT vs Shreelekha Damani (307 CTR 218) (2019) (Bom. HC)  Inder International vs ACIT (ITA No. 1573/Chd/2018) dtd. 07.06.2021 (ITAT Chd.)  ACIT vs. M/s Serajuddin& Co. Kolkata (ITA Nos. 39 to 45 of 2022) dtd. 15.03.2023 (Orissa HC).  In PCIT vs. Siddarth Gupta [(2023) 450 ITR 534] (All. HC). 16.14 It was further submitted that it is also evident from the assessment order as well as…

Veena Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-25, Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 295/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 294/Del/2022, (A.Y. 2016-17) & Ita No. 295/Del/2022, (A.Y. 2017-18) Veena Singh Vs. Acit Flat 5, 2Nd Floor, J-21, Central Circle-25 South Extension Part-1, Room No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Delhi Ara Centre, Jhandewalan, Pan: Axjps9588H Delhi

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 44ASection 68Section 69A

…Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in Shreelekha Damani vs. DCIT 173 TTJ 332(Mum.) which has been approved by jurisdictional High Court subsequently, reported in Veena Singh Vs. ACIT 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the Assessee, wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under:- “1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 19th August, 2015. 2. Following question was argued before us for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of…

Veena Singh, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle25, Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 294/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 294/Del/2022, (A.Y. 2016-17) & Ita No. 295/Del/2022, (A.Y. 2017-18) Veena Singh Vs. Acit Flat 5, 2Nd Floor, J-21, Central Circle-25 South Extension Part-1, Room No. 322, 3Rd Floor, Delhi Ara Centre, Jhandewalan, Pan: Axjps9588H Delhi

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 44ASection 68Section 69A

…Such perfunctory approval has no legal sanctity in the eyes of the law. The decision of the co-ordinate bench in Shreelekha Damani vs. DCIT 173 TTJ 332(Mum.) which has been approved by jurisdictional High Court subsequently, reported in Veena Singh Vs. ACIT 307 CTR 218 affirms the plea of the Assessee, wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under:- “1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 19th August, 2015. 2. Following question was argued before us for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of…