← All Phrases

“mechanical approval”

ReassessmentSection 151Section 1511,395 judgments

The decision most relied on for mechanical approval is PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar (163 Taxmann.com 9), cited in 597 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on mechanical approval

PCIT v. Shiv Kumar Nayyar
163 Taxmann.com 9 · 2024 · High Court
597
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D for search assessments is invalid if granted mechanically, hastily, or without due application of mind, such as on the same day as the proposal or in a bunched manner. Such an invalid approval renders the consequential assessment order under Section 153A void ab initio.

CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd.
64 Taxmann.com 313 · 2015 · Supreme Court
340
citing judgments

A mechanical approval by the prescribed authority under Section 151, made without independent application of mind, vitiates and renders the entire reassessment proceedings invalid. Such approvals, often indicated by brief, unreasoned endorsements, lead to the quashing of the reopening of assessment.

ACIT v. Sirajuddin& Co.
150 Taxmann.com 146 · 2023 · High Court
288
citing judgments

An approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act must demonstrate that the approving authority applied its mind to the draft assessment order, and a perfunctory or mechanical approval invalidates subsequent adjustments.

Shreelekha Damani v. DCIT
173 TTJ 332 · 2015 · ITAT
236
citing judgments

Approval granted by a superior authority under Section 153D in a mechanical or perfunctory manner, without proper application of mind, lacks legal sanctity and renders the subsequent assessment order null and void.

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Subodh Agarwal
149 Taxmann.com 373 · 2023 · High Court
194
citing judgments

Approval of draft assessment orders under Section 153D must be granted with due application of mind, not mechanically. Approving multiple cases, such as 38 in a single day, without proper scrutiny amounts to mechanical approval, rendering the assessment invalid.

Madhya Pradesh in CIT v. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemicals Ltd.
56 Taxmann.com 390 · 2015 · High Court
188
citing judgments

A sanction for issuing a notice under section 148 is invalid if the sanctioning authority grants approval mechanically, merely recording 'Yes, I am satisfied' without proper application of mind to the reasons for reassessment. The authority must demonstrate proper consideration to fulfill the statutory obligation under section 151.

PCIT v. Anuj Bansal
165 Taxmann.com 2 · 2024 · High Court
181
citing judgments

An approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is considered mechanical and invalid if granted without application of mind and without perusing relevant assessment records, including seized material. This principle has been affirmed by multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court.

Vijayadevi Naval Kishore Bharatia v. Land Acquisition Officer
5 SCC 83 · 2003 · Supreme Court
167
citing judgments

Statutory approvals required under the Income Tax Act, particularly for assessments, must reflect a genuine application of mind by the approving authority and cannot be mechanical or granted without due consideration.

Judgments citing mechanical approval

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Cental Circle-3, Jaipur, Jodhpur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 59/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Cental Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 57/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Shri Dipendra Singh, Tonk vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 251/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

DCIT ITA 5241/Del/2015, ITAT Pune in Santosh Subhashappa Mukta vs. DCIT, ITA 18,19 & 20/PUN/2021, where assessments framed on the basis of mechanical approvals u/s 153D were held to be invalid and quashed. Since the facts of the case on hand and the facts of the case laws as cited

Shri Dipendra Singh, Tonk vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 250/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

DCIT ITA 5241/Del/2015, ITAT Pune in Santosh Subhashappa Mukta vs. DCIT, ITA 18,19 & 20/PUN/2021, where assessments framed on the basis of mechanical approvals u/s 153D were held to be invalid and quashed. Since the facts of the case on hand and the facts of the case laws as cited

Shri Dipendra Singh, Tonk vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 249/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

DCIT ITA 5241/Del/2015, ITAT Pune in Santosh Subhashappa Mukta vs. DCIT, ITA 18,19 & 20/PUN/2021, where assessments framed on the basis of mechanical approvals u/s 153D were held to be invalid and quashed. Since the facts of the case on hand and the facts of the case laws as cited

Shri Dipendra Singh, Tonk vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 248/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

DCIT ITA 5241/Del/2015, ITAT Pune in Santosh Subhashappa Mukta vs. DCIT, ITA 18,19 & 20/PUN/2021, where assessments framed on the basis of mechanical approvals u/s 153D were held to be invalid and quashed. Since the facts of the case on hand and the facts of the case laws as cited

Shri Dipendra Singh, Tonk vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

ITA 247/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

DCIT ITA 5241/Del/2015, ITAT Pune in Santosh Subhashappa Mukta vs. DCIT, ITA 18,19 & 20/PUN/2021, where assessments framed on the basis of mechanical approvals u/s 153D were held to be invalid and quashed. Since the facts of the case on hand and the facts of the case laws as cited

Bindal Smelting Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2665/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Shivam Garg, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 151

position emanating from the record, we hereby quote CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC) that such a mechanical approval vitiates the entire reopening; and therefore, we accept the instant legal ground in very terms. The impugned reopening is quashed therefore. 5. All other

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2309/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Court accepts such pieces of paper who can tomorrow stop an assesse from substituting a signed paper with another unsigned paper? 11.4 On mechanical approval aspect of PCIT Central dated 28.06.2022 with only remarks “approved”, ld. Counsel again relied Hon’ble Delhi High court decision in case of SBC minerals

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 13, Delhi

ITA 2308/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Court accepts such pieces of paper who can tomorrow stop an assesse from substituting a signed paper with another unsigned paper? 11.4 On mechanical approval aspect of PCIT Central dated 28.06.2022 with only remarks “approved”, ld. Counsel again relied Hon’ble Delhi High court decision in case of SBC minerals

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, Delhi

ITA 2306/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Court accepts such pieces of paper who can tomorrow stop an assesse from substituting a signed paper with another unsigned paper? 11.4 On mechanical approval aspect of PCIT Central dated 28.06.2022 with only remarks “approved”, ld. Counsel again relied Hon’ble Delhi High court decision in case of SBC minerals

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2305/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Court accepts such pieces of paper who can tomorrow stop an assesse from substituting a signed paper with another unsigned paper? 11.4 On mechanical approval aspect of PCIT Central dated 28.06.2022 with only remarks “approved”, ld. Counsel again relied Hon’ble Delhi High court decision in case of SBC minerals

Hoshiyari, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward-1, Rewari

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

ITA 5864/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Hoshiyari C/O Anu Jain & Vs. Income Tax Officer, Company, 272 R, First Floor, Ward-1, Near Palika Complex, Model Rewari. Town, Rewari (Haryana) Pin: 123 401 Pan :Bmdpd2079Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 250Section 54

erred in assumption of jurisdiction U/s 147/148 of the Act on the basis of non-existent section deleted w.e.f. 01.04.1989 and also mechanical approval of Ld. Addl. CIT, Rewari Range, which made reopening proceedings absolutely illegal, void ab initio and needs to be quashed. 3. That

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-19, Delhi, New Delhi vs. Deepa Talwar, Delhi

In the result, the cross objections filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5518/DEL/2024[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumaracit, Central Circle 19, Vs. Deepa Talwar, Delhi. 6/14, Shanti Niketan, Delhi – 110 021. (Pan : Aaupt4464F) Co No.62/Del/2025 (In Ita No.5518/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Deepa Talwar, Vs. Acit, Central Circle 19, 6/14, Shanti Niketan, Delhi. Delhi – 110 021. (Pan : Aaupt4464F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Aggarwal, Ca Shri Lakshya Gupta, Ca Shri Smakash Mahajan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.08.2025 Date Of Order : 15.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-31, New Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 03.09.2024 For Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 153BSection 153D

gross contravention of provisions of section 153D of the act being necessary approval accorded by Ld. Jt.CIT, Central Range – 5, Delhi was a mechanical approval and assessment completed on the basis of said approval is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.” 3. Before deciding the legal issue

Lovely Rani Constructions Private Limited, Patna Bihar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Patna

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

ITA 267/PAT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

For Appellant: Shri Prince Chugh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the ld. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The ld.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case

Saroj Bala, Patna vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna

ITA 235/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 &

For Appellant: Shri Prince Chugh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the Id. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The Id.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case

Saroj Bala, Patna vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

ITA 234/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

For Appellant: Shri Prince Chugh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the ld. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The ld.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case

Saroj Bala, Patna vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

ITA 233/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 &

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the Id. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The Id.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Patna, Patna vs. Lovely Rani Construction Private Ltd, Patna

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

ITA 295/PAT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 &

For Appellant: Shri Prince Chugh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the Id. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The Id.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1, Patna vs. Murlidhar Prasad, Patna

In the result, ITA Nos.233-235/PAT/2024, ITA Nos

ITA 293/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna14 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.233, 234 & 235/Pat/2024 & Saroj Bala, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aaspb 3828 P & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.267/Pat/24 & Ita Nos.279, 282 & 283/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19) & Cross Objection No.02/Pat/2023 (Arising Out Of Ita No.295/Pat/2023) (Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd Vs Acit, Circle-1, Patna 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.295/Pat/2023 (नििाारण वर्ा / A.Yrs : 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna Vs Lovely Rani Constructions Pvt Ltd 301, Raj Krishna Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aabcl 8329 H & आयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.272, 273, 274, 275, 276 & 278/Pat/2023 (A.Yrs : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2018-19) Murlidhar Prasad, Vs Acit, Central Circle-1, Patna 101, Ramayan Apartment, New Dakbaglow Road, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Aekpp 1361 D

For Appellant: Shri Prince Chugh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

validity of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act on the ground of being based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the ld. JCIT, Central Range-1, Patna u/s 153D of the Act. 7. Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed ... Assessing Officer u/s.153A of the Act dated 24.08.2021 was invalid as the same is based upon the invalid and mechanical approval granted by the JCIT u/s 153D of the Act. The ld.AR submitted that the JCIT is supposed to grant approval after going through the facts of the case